ECdesigns

[Ben75]

5 hours ago, Norton said:

Yes I have the ETL too but I haven’t tried it out yet.  Most of my time so far has been spent trying to figure out the new UPL.  For me at least it’s a whole new workload  to now setup library as tagged wav.  However, I’ve found that you can get going using sticks set up for the UPL16, it’s just V. hard to navigate them.  So far the biggest headache in my case at least seems to be that the new UPL is fussy as to which sticks it will actually read. 
 

Having said this, I’m currently listening to Barenboim Elgar1 in 24/96 and it sounds just glorious. In one word, I’d describe the sound of the UPL/DAC combo as  “expensive”, as in I spent some time with DAVE in my system a while back and it would be interesting to compare the 2 DACs  back to back on RBCD and 24/96. 

 

Hello Norton,

 

So great to hear some news about your test of those great electronics!

 

Are you saying that you had the very expansive Chord DAVE DAC in your setup in the past ? 

Just to keep you up about some news : EC Designs will certainly propose a new USB cable - cheaper than the UC250 - for powering the Fractal DA96ETL DAC at its best.

So you can be sure that the Fractal DAC will sound better in a coming future, with this little upgrade! 🙂

 

Then, could you please tell us more about the U192ETL sound quality - and especially in comparison with the UPL16?

 

Many thanks in advance and enjoy! Lucky man! 🙂

All the best,

Benoit

[Ben75]

On 6/7/2020 at 6:50 PM, Norton said:

I’ve put in some listening  time with the UPL/DAC96 combo.  My impressions so  far are that they sound somewhat different, rather than evolving from, the previous UPL/MOS: a very substantial, quite forward, “3D” sound, wide soundstage, highly resolving with plenty of newly  heard detail, particularly  impressive with brass, woodwind, piano, plucked harp strings  etc.  Listening to well recorded 24/96 classical downloads I thought I knew well has become quite an immersive experience.

 

In  my experience thats’s a rare  combination, so many dacs offer plenty of detail but the overall sound lacks depth and substance and thus never really convinces as an illusion of real musicians playing  in a  space.  From  recollection of it in my system, DAVE  also impressed through a similar combination of detail and substance; maybe a back to back comparison with DAC/UPL96 would be interesting,  perhaps allowing DAVE to be fed by a Taiko Audio server to level the playing  field a bit, after all there are different ways of doing  “extreme”...

 

I’m concentrating on getting to know the new UPL so haven’t tried the ETL yet.

 

Hello Norton,

 

Would you please share with us in the coming days your impressions about the U192ETL please? What are the major differences between the U192ETL and the UPL96 according to you?

 

Best,

Ben

[Ben75]

15 hours ago, hopkins said:

I need another set of ears to help me out with this 😩

 

 

Hi Stéphane,

 

you can call back Michel and W Roberts and perhaps organise a great listening time next week? It will b a pleasure to come anyway.

 

Thank you for your great feedback, as well as the tapatrick helpful tests!

Ben

[Ben75]

38 minutes ago, bodiebill said:

 

I must have been tired of all the comparisons, and omitted this one on the basis of the U192ETL + Terminator combo SQ deteriorating by just adding streaming (E vs G). So why add streaming at all? Well, because most of the buzz here is about the ECD combo mitigating the upstream noise. So I added H and here is the result (subjective of course as always):

 

This shows how successful the ECD combo is. H at least equals E, so that is a great job. Plus all the convenience that comes with it. And the cost effectiveness. (I think I could do without the Terminator if I did not have the SDTrans384 or want to listen to native DSD once in a while.)

 

Sorry to have kept all in suspense, but for me this looks like the icing on the cake.

My problem now -- but also fun -- is that I have too many great sounding options to choose from.

Time will learn what I will settle into...

 

If I would be convicted to H only, I would be a happy man.

Thank you for his work! 🙂

 

what is the interest of the DSD according to your ears? 😉

It seems to me that 24bot in 96kHz is already the top of the sound quality, isnt’t it?

DSD has a major : size... it is so heavy, like Wave files!

 

I think the next step for us will be to try the PowerDAC as it seems to be a great synergy with their combo! After that should be left only the speakers quality and some minor improvement on their electronics perhaps?

[Ben75]

22 hours ago, bodiebill said:

 

I used to convert everything to DSD as my previous DAC's DSD circuit was much better than its PCM circuit. It was a Lampizator Lite/Big 7 hybrid.

 

The Terminator that I am now using has a gorgeous PCM circuit, so I no longer convert flac files to DSD. I understand the Terminator upsamples all PCM to a whopping PCM1536 when in OS mode. This sounds slightly better to my ears than its NOS mode.

 

However, playing good original DSD material, upsampled to DSD256, has a certain magic that is missing from the same converted to HR PCM. A certain mildness, effortlessness, airiness. It is all very subtle but appreciated in longer listening sessions.

 

But I must say that I never thought the format itself is 'better', it is all chain dependent, as shown by the different DAC's. That is why it is not unthinkable that I would listen to PCM only. Otherwise I would not have dived so deep into the ECD gear.

 

By the way, my DSD files are packed in WavPack (wv) lossless format (40-50% size reduction, using f.i. xrecode3) and can be played directly by JRiver (not preferred) or the Russian Album Player console version that I run within wtfplay. But for serious listening I quickly convert them (again using xrecode3) to DSD256 dff format for the SDTrans384 or HX500.

 

Apologies if some of this is somewhat off-topic, however it is part of the playing field that helps assessing the value of ECD gear.

Many thanks for this great answer: you did answer to my questions.

 

when ECD will launch their PowerDAC it should be interested to compare the Terminator through DSD files and their PowerDAC through Flac 24bits and 96kHz. Depending of the potential coming reviews of the PowerDAC that some will write, would you expect to purchase it or not?

Perhaps the PowerDAC will be a much refined solution overall because all of its components will be powered by a great LPSU homemade by John Brown.

Anyway, many thanks for your great feedbacks!

 

Ben

[Ben75]

17 hours ago, matthias said:

 

OK, I have Qobuz Studio free trial, will try Spotify as well.

 

Any listening impressions from others?

 

Thanks

 

Matt

Hello Matt : according to John own words... streaming is not great at all and he would recommend you to rip yourself the CDs in Flac or Wave to get he best sound quality.

 

The apparently limitations with streaming providers are they use a DSP to process music playback so it not transparent anymore.

[Ben75]

2 hours ago, hopkins said:

I plan on trying Daphile on my NUC, as this is linux based LMS. Have to take the time to swap the internal SSD. 

Good idea to try Daphile, even if this is a kind of streaming usable software which require internet to be driven. But it seems to be a great and easy to install configuration. You can easily boot a USB Key with this light software and play music through your external HDD.

 

2 hours ago, hopkins said:

LMS+squeezelite is bit perfect, but for some reason it just does not sound as good. No idea why. Have not tried Roon, as I do not have a subscription (and don't want to bother). 

Perhaps is it because software solutions (when you divide your media and the player) is kind of worse than a local storage solution?

By the way, many thanks for your tests inputs here ! 🙂

[Ben75]

5 hours ago, hopkins said:

By the way, if you have any doubts about EMI/RFI, you can take a small battery operated AM radio and pass the antenna over your equipmemt. It is a very approximate way of identifying noise emissions, but still an interesting test.

 

Dead silent when it is above the ECD units, but there is some serious noise coming out of my NUC, not to mention my desktop computer. My NUC is placed about 2 meters from the DAC. My desktop computer is in another room. 

 

If you want to play it safe, it is not sufficient keeping a powerful server away from your rig. Even small low-power players (NUC, Raspberrypi, etc..) can emit a lot of garbage... An aluminum case may not be of much help, as these emissions can escape easily through vents, cable sockets etc.

 

Avoiding placing any computer in your audio rack is probably a "best practice". 

Hi Hopkins,

 

Do you connect your NUC to the Internet through RJ45 cable or through Wifi during your listenning sessions?

Wifi can be really bad, isn't it?

 

Best,

[Ben75]

18 hours ago, hopkins said:

I had a listening session this afternoon at @Ben75. Another friend, who has "good ears", was present. Ben has some very nice, large, DIY speakers, that work surprisingly well in his small room. He has a JOB Int amp, which has analog inputs, but these inputs go through the JOB's DAC. So I bought along my Lavardin IS-X integrated amplifier, along with the ECD "stack" (DAC + UPL + U192). I also bought the Khadas Tone Board DAC, to use a starting point in our comparisons.

 

The Khadas DAC is interesting - it has a very seductive presentation, with no obvious faults other than some lack of transparency. 

 

We then played the U192+Fractal DAC, using several sources: his desktop PC, my chromebook (using Linux), and my tablet (using USB Audio Pro). None of them gave satisfying sound - in fact it was quite a disappointment. Worse than the Khadas ! 

 

We switched to the UPL and everything sounded "right" again, producing the sound that we were used to from the UPL: very transparent, yet "smooth" and highly realistic ("vinyl like" according to my friend).

 

We then proceeded to unplug a number of devices that were connected to the same power outlet: an SMPS, his large TV used as a computer screen, etc.. I had bought along my small AM radio to identify "noisy" gear, and it was interesting for everyone to witness the amount of noise produced by these devices. 

 

We played music again with the U192, using first his PC as a source. The sound was definitely more in line with my own experience at home, and did not have the obvious faults of the previous run. We switched to his Windows laptop computer, and it was a little better. We finally  used his girlfriend's MacBook Air (battery powered - using foobar but without the WASAPI plugin - probably bit-perfect on OSX, but could not confirm), and that resulted in a very satisfying sound quality, probably close to the UPL, though we ran out of time and did not get a chance to compare it to the UPL again. Of the three (desktop PC, windows laptop, Macbook), the Macbook is certainly the lowest-noise device.

 

Perhaps in the first tests the U192 had not "warmed up" yet, or perhaps the surrounding high noise devices created some interferences that the UPL (which does not receive music data from the "control" computer) was less sensitive to ?

 

It was fun to try all this, and impressive to see how good music can sound playing from a "plain vanilla" MacBook (without any audiophile tweaks or audiophile gadgets attached). Thanks Ben for your hospitality (and excellent home made apple pie) !

 

I am not done with my tests at home, but very happy with the SQ - I think I can take it a little step further - to be continued...

It was a pleasing moment to see you at home Stéphane! Michel, the other friend of us, is excellent and very objectif/neutral when speaking of the "rightness" of the sound.

 

For me, the UPL has this ability to get a detailed and very realistic reporduction of instruments/voices etc. but it has also this ability to play without any stress, without any confusions of the different sounds.. Each sound "play its own life", they are more than entied : they produce their own energy, in perfect coherence with the other source of sounds.

 

MacBook Air is a great player with quasi no noise.

 

Next step will be to try this solutions with a audiophile software etc. To be continued..

 

Thank you again Hopkins for this great moment ! 🙂

[Ben75]

13 hours ago, tapatrick said:

I have tried Audirvana on a Macbook pro (on batteries) playing Tidal compared to my usual set up of Antipodes DXe playing Tidal through Roon. Both are perfect and I would be very happy with either. If I did not have the Antipodes I would use either Roon/Tidal or Audirvana/Tidal and call it a day.

 

This confirms my previous findings that I am losing interest in trying out different sources and further tweaking. I'm convinced the U192>ElectroTos>Fractal DAC (with clean power on both U192 and DAC plus an extra layer of Aluminium casing and heavy weights on each unit) is a game changing set of components. The enjoyment of music is what I am called back to not further tweaking and I am seeking out interesting recordings which I always did before - now this has taken over completely. At present I am working my way through Paul McGowan (of PS Audio) playlist 'Pauls Pick' on Tidal.

Hello Tapatrick,

 

Do you expect to resell both of your Ps Audio DAC and Antipods?

 

Hello Matthias,
Next time we will try Audirvana (which I found expensive) and Swisian.. but Foobar2000 sounded almost as good as the UPL96. But it is still possible that the software play a role..

 

Are you going to give a try to EC Designs electronics? We shared with you enough information/reviews with you, isn’t it? 🙂

[Ben75]

9 hours ago, tapatrick said:

No I will probably keep both. The Antipodes is a dedicated music server and allows for continuous software upgrades from the company. I wouldn't be happy using my macbook pro as music source as it has other uses as well. The PSAudio Junior is a very versatile and lovely sounding DAC with many inputs - also allows for free software updates which can be significant changes in SQ. If the EC DAC had more than 1 input I would reconsider.

Hello Tapatrick,

 

What other input would you want on the Fractal DAC? 🙂

Just a question : can you give a try to the Macbook Pro with and without charging to the wall outlet? What were the differences of sound? Have you or would you get the opportunity to compare the Macbook Pro to a Macbook Air please?

What is your version of the Macbook Pro you use? What was its launch year?

 

Many thanks in advance for your answers.

 

2 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

I added also some aluminum plates under some of my equipmemt. Just ordered a couple of those door stoppers to try out. A friend of mine uses them and I was meaning to try them. 

 

I made a strange discovery this afternoon. I put my portable AM radio, above the back of the DAC, set at 198 khz, and it "recieved" the music I was playing at the time! I powered off my amplifier, and confirmed it comes from the DAC. Wrote to John Brown about it, to get his opinion (will see if he answers) Perhaps this is normal, I did not try with other DACs.

 

I managed to get really good sound out of my Raspberrypi 4, with wifi and a linear power supply, but more about this later - I need some time to confirm.

 

Getting noise at a minimum in that 20Mhz bandwidth is really not obvious, as there is no way of knowing what source will produce the best results. You simply cannot find any measurements for this, from manufactures (computers or other related source components). 

 

I looked up an article by Archimago that I remembered reading a while ago, in which there were measurements of USB "noise" out of various laptops: http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/05/measurements-computer-usb-5v-power.html?m=1

 

Interestingly, a Macbook did not perform that well in those tests, but  they were measuring power line noise only. Still interesting to see the variability in measurements. 

 

The conclusion was that the noise is below audibility, but we know that this is not the way to look at this... 

 

 

Perhaps the Macbook Pro of this time was too noisy and that the Macbook Air of 2013 was excellent compared to it?

It seems strange that they come to those results..

 

58 minutes ago, hopkins said:

To illustrate, I was reading this afternoon on a French forum a local "authority" explaining that upnp has a sharper sound and Roon has a "rounder" sound, and he was wondering where the truth lay. This type of comment illustrates the difficulty of drawing any serious conclusions from tests done with a compromised digital system (even if it does cost thousands of euros). For all we know, this could simply be particular to a given system, at a given time, and of no general benefit. Add to that the fact that "followers" tend to convince themselves of something when opinion leaders speak about them, without even attempting to challenge them...   The U192 is going to bring back some "order" (sanity) to things ☺️

 

I can't be more agree with you...

John told me one time that different "audiophiles" cables had different sound signature but ... did they sound better from each other or from standard cables? We can't be so sure...

It seems that his cables are really great anyway!

[Ben75]

23 hours ago, tapatrick said:

Hi Ben. The Fractal DAC has only one input - the ElectroTos, and this will not allow for much pulling and inserting as it is not robust. The PS Audio Junior DAC has - I²S, Coax, XLR Balanced, TOSLINK, USB, & Ethernet inputs. Connected to a preamp this allows me to run the EC Combo for seriously enjoyable music and switch to the Junior DAC for other inputs.

 

Regarding the different Macs, I could currently do tests comparing a 2017 iMAC, a 2015 Macbook pro, a 2020 Macbook pro, and 2012 Mac Air but I honestly don't think there is any point. However the Macbook Pro 2015 whether connected to AC or running on battery does not make a difference with the EC Combo. And I am clear that I would never run the Macbook pro (without the EC Combo) as a music source on it's own as I cannot stand the harshness, yet with the EC Combo I could live with it. So I doubt there will be much difference between the different Macs but I havn't tried them all in comparison.

 

Hello Tapatrick,

Thank you for you answer! I would be really interested if you could give a try with both MacBook Air 2012 and MacBook Pro(s) first on battery and then plugged into the AC outlet. For those 4 situations : Does it sound as good (or close) as the Antipodes USB output?

 

Like Hopkins I would be curious to know your experience feedback from using RasberryPi as a source! 🙂

 

15 hours ago, Norton said:

I don’t see any signs that this will be the case in the foreseeable future.  I imagine that the PowerDAC  will be in the order of several times the cost of the current combo.  Min €3-€4K would be my expectation.

 

14 hours ago, matthias said:

Agree, if you want say 25W per channel it will be even more expensive, IMO.

The PowerDAC will be a second line of products, too expensive for many.

I hope you are wrong guys! 🙂

John has never been eager to make a lot of money : this is clearly not his first objective/preoccupation. He largely prefer to keep in touch with people who want to appreciate music and want to improve his solutions via feedbacks.

Anyway, 4k or even 3k € would be too expensive for me ... I hope he will find the right target price to allow non-idiophile people to get a great all in one solution at an affordable price.

 

15 hours ago, hopkins said:

Ripping CDs is a little time consuming, but once it is done, there is no reason to go back to CD playback IMO, at least not if you have the new ECD set. 

I am perfectly agree with you Hopkins. I don't see the practical/sonical benefits to keep physical CDs rather than great ripping of them.

 

13 hours ago, Huubster said:

 

I had a chat about this with John and he mnentioned the PowerDAC is very, VERY, inefficient. I don't know the exact number anymore, so don't quote me on that, but I remember John saying that the 6w version would draw something like 400/500 watt continiously. So apart from feasibility of even a more powerfull version, be carefull what you wish for..

 

Last message I read from him was about 60W constant with his 90dB Open Bafffle loudspeakers... Which is already somehow high in comparison to a transistor amplifier using "constant steering voltage" technology (mine, a Job INTegrated in Class AB, produces less than 30W in continuous, even when it tackles with big loads).

 

It is "not too bad" according to his own word and this is effectively a great result he reached! My feeling is : he is going to improve his topology in the coming months to get better efficiency results and the best integration fo the U192 and Fractal DAC (for better sound quality. Patience is the last thing that we still have.

[Ben75]

1 hour ago, Huubster said:

 

Don't forget that hopkins feeds the RPi with a 700 euro power supply..

 

@hopkins: I assume that contributes to your sound quality big time right?

Just a message from John who can be trusted to have tested almost all of the main PS solution out there so far for his own RPI4.

 

"I use:

 

Macbook air 1.8GHz Dual Core i5 mid2012

Macbook Pro Retina 2.4 GHz Quad Core i7, early 2013.

 

Apple makes relatively quiet (interference) laptops because of high efficiency (optimise battery life). This greatly reduces interference power levels compared to other brands.

The macbooks are battery powered (clean power supply) and the battery charger outputs the lowest noise of all chargers we tested.

 

RPI4 is quite powerful and with a clean power supply it is comparable with a macbook running on battery power supply. PCs usually produce way more interference (mains power, no need to conserve power) so perhaps a PC or server (even running on Linux) is just not not optimal for audio.

So it is simply a matter of using a relatively clean bit-perfect source.

 

For RPI4 you need a -linear- 5V / 2.5A power supply like this one for example:

https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/hifi-power-supply/linear-power-supply-5v-25a-13w-usb-lt1084-p-10532.html

https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/hifi-power-supply/audiophonics-lpsu15-linear-regulated-power-supply-5v-25a-15va-with-usb-p-10255.html

 

Quality doesn't matter that much as long as it is linear and it can provide 5V / 2.5A. You need 2.5A for the RPI4, 2A is not enough. Wiring with low DC resistance is also very important at 2.5A peak current,  use thick wiring + suitable adapter plug."

 

So, in conclusion, a simple but reliable LPSU would do the job on par with the Kaces PSU. So yes : the EC Designs combo has never been so cheap and performant in terms of SQ (if John is right). I can't wait to get the confirmation of that with Hopkins another day - and hope he will get the chance to send back his Kaces P8 in time ... for refunding ! 😉

 

Beyond the conveniency of Streaming Services (Qobuz etc.), John told me that Streaming was not as great as local files, ripped from a CD and should be abandoned for serious listenning sessions (because of DSPs, online masters tweaked etc.)... Perhaps there is an answer there to the question : "What is the best streaming services platform"? If you have a fine tuned High-end hifi setup, perhaps this is not ideal to use streaming services playback at all.

 

Anyway, the few albums I downloaded from Qobuz were always worse than extracting the masters myself from XCDs. 🙂

[Ben75]

10 hours ago, hopkins said:

@tapatrick  There is definitely a warm-up time needed, probably more for the DAC than either the U192 or UPL. Otherwise your impressions are similar to mine.

 

I have also noticed a significant improvement when properly powering the U192. I had previously tested various power supplies, and 5v battery packs. I recently thought of powering it with the batteries from the previous UPL - and bingo ! Those batteries are lithium 3.7v, and the U192 runs fine on them (5v is not needed). I ordered another battery with double the capacity: https://www.tme.eu/fr/details/accu-lp805080_cl/accumulateurs/cellevia-batteries/lp805080/ 

 

5v battery packs typically used to charge phones have zero benefit. They include some regulators which probably generate noise, and the batteries may be of lower quality.

 

I am going to use the case and circuit of the previous UPL to power the U192, and have ordred  a Ghent Audio Y cable: https://www.ghentaudio.com/usb/u21.html. So it should be a fairly "clean" setup.

 

In terms of source, I have found that the lower the power the better. The Pi 4 runs fine, but the Pi 3 A+ is even better, if all you are doing is streaming (either from services or from your home server): https://www.raspberrypi.org/products/raspberry-pi-3-model-a-plus/ The Pi Zero W has the lowest power consumption and processor, and can run on 3.7v batteries (connected to the 5v supply), but unfortunately WiFi is problematic with high resolution files (16/44 is ok in my house, but 24/96 a disaster). The Pi 3 A+ runs extremely well, and at much lower temperatures (35C) than the Pi 4. I am still using piCorePlayer, and it runs fine. There are many distributions out there that are probably just as good.

 

Once you power the U192 seperately from the source, I believe the power supply of the source is not as critical (but better play it safe).

 

I believe the UPL could benefit also from a clean power source. On Friday, I tested the UPL at a friend's, connected to a noisy laptop, and used one of those 5v battery rechargers to supply power to the UPL seperately - it was a mistake. 

 

I now wish they had kept the same battery supply mechanism than they had in the previous models. There are problems shipping units with batteries, and that may be one reason why they changed ?

 

 

Many thanks for your excellent feedbacks Stéphane !

 

How do you stream local music files through your Pi 3 A+? Through WiFi? If this is the case : does it work well with 24/192 kHz files? 🙂

 

Could you let us know the answer from John concerning the 3,7v battery pack potential use?

 

Hope to see you soon after holidays... perhaps at Roberto flat to challenge its Terminator + SOtM SMS 200 Ultra streamer? 😉

 

Great job for your tests!

[Ben75]

3 hours ago, hopkins said:

My system has improved, and the U192 nows plays consistently well, but I have to admit the UPL is still a little notch above. Oh well, I can't complain! Streaming is very satisfying, better than it has ever been for me, and if there are a few favorite albums I want to play on the UPL, that's all good as well. 

 

I enjoyed listening to this one this morning: http://mycloudplayer.herokuapp.com/album#1567009768041. Read the comments by Jan Evensmo on this album. He's got some really good recommendations if you are into vintage jazz:http://www.jazzarcheology.com/

 

These 1950  recordings sound really good on either the UPL or the  U192 😁

Its a blessing! 

 

But LOL, I did try a 3.7v battery supply on the DAC and its a little added bonus if you want to tweak... 

Hello Stephane,

 

How great it is to see you happy with the U192 and the Fractal DAC! It means a lot as you have tweaked a lot around those months and that you have tried really high end components (Kaces P8 etc.).

 

Can you describe more on the improvement of the Fractal DAC powered through the battery pack? Did it allow you to shorten the burn-in delay relative to each beginning of listening session or was it the same?

 

How does sound the ECD combo(s) with your DT990 headphone? Better than with previous EC DAC? 🙂

[Ben75]

2 hours ago, bodiebill said:

Had some problems making a usb stick for the UPL. Now it appears that the wav files (24/96 at most and below) I created with Xrecode3 cannot be read by the upl_remote app. When using EZ CD Audio Converter or dBPoweramp, it goes well. If anyone has an idea what I could be doing wrong with Xrecode3, I would be obliged as this is now my preferred conversion app.

You should try this software - quoted on the UPL website page of ECD :

 

 

« Creating your first USB stick with ID3v2.3.0 wav files

---

Before you start converting music to be used with the UPL96ETL and UPL_remote software it is advisable to first try to create a single USB test stick with one or two test CDs.

For this we will use kid3 Audio Tagger software: https://kid3.kde.org/

This software will run on Linux/Windows/OSX.

It allows you to create and check ID3v2.3.0 tagged wav files, you will probably use other software like XLD (OSX) or dbpoweramp (Windows) to batch convert tagged lossless audio files to wav + ID3v2.3.0 but kid3 can be a valuable tool to check if other batch conversion software does the job correctly. »

 

Good luck with that! 🙂

[Ben75]

11 minutes ago, realDHT said:

U192 and fractal DAC arrived 2 days ago  2 weeks after I ordered it, so faster than the 3-4 weeks estimation given in the webstore (I am in Europe). I first let the music server and ecd combo play for a full day without amplification, for some break-in. Then it was time for A/B comparisons with my other DAC, which I believe is a fairly nice ESS9018 implementation with Amanero USB input and transformer output stage, it is described here http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html  

 

Source: DIY music server similar to Nenon projects (Ryzen 3700x CPU, Apacer ECC memory, ASUS rog Strix x470 motherboard, Optane 900P for OS, External usb HDD for music, JCAT Femto USB card. Windows Server 2019, Audiophile Optimizer, Process Lasso, JRiver player). All external and internal server components powered with separate linear regulated rails, including CPU and ATX voltages.  

 

5V power to the ECD fractal DAC via an iFi iUSBpower (the iFi was fed 9V from a Salas UltraBib shunt regulator). 

5V power and signal to the U192 via JCAT Femto USBcard (USB card fed with 5V Salas UltraBib shunt regulator),

 

Amplifier: DIY electrostatic headphone amplifier (DACs connected directly to this amplifier, volume via JRiver internal volume DSP)

Headphones: STAX SR-007 mk2 electrostatics. 

 

Impressions:

The ECD combo sounds warmer, smoother, more relaxed, more effortless than my 9018 DAC. I find acoustic instruments to sound more real with the ECD. On most recordings, the difference is not subtle, it is very easy to hear. For example I percieved much more life-like rendering of harpsichord (J. S. Bach: Concertos for Harpsichord and Strings, The English Concert/Trevor Pinnock, Archiv Produktion, 1982) and a huge improvement in percussion, higher frequencies in particular (Eva Cassidy, Still not ready for the good times, Imagine, 2002). 

Voices also sound better with ECD, no harshness and a touch more presence. ECD is more resolving overall.

 

On one recording (Alison Krauss, Live, 2002), I found the difference between both DACs to be much less apparent, and I had difficulties to pick a clear preferrence on that one. Found that a bit strange. The Krauss recording is 24 bit / 88.2 kHz, while the others are redbook format, could be part of the reason maybe? 

 

I will definately keep this one.         

Hi realDHT,

 

Great to see you trying the ECD combo and to read your feedbacks.

Something you could certainly improve is to use a shunt resistor for managing the volume (like the SVC 24 from ECD) as it seems that Jriver volume control does not maintain a bit perfect playback.

 

Enjoy the listening! 🙂

[Ben75]

2 hours ago, Norton said:

Anyone have the UC250 cable and able to comment on comparative SQ vs other cables?  Wondered if really worth spending €80 to replace the basic cable I’m currently using from BDP to U192?  

Hello Norton,

 

I can speak a little bit about my experience with the UC250 at Hopkins house against my Curious Cable (considered by many as a reference cable at a non so-expensive price).

I would say that the Curious was a little bit more "precise" which at the end is more revealing of micro details. But the UC250 is a great cable (especially if you don't anticipate to inject 5Vpower externally as tapatrick did) and the Curious is just a little bit superior - and doesn't justify such a high price according to my ears.

 

If I was you I should try this Y cable with a good battery (like Hopkins did?) that will handle powering the U192. It is certainly giving the best result by far : https://www.ghentaudio.com/usb/u22.html

I let Hopkins to share with you the battery reference (that may help others too) and the reference of DC adaptor to connect the battery to this Y usb cable?

 

Anyway, I would say that a good USB cable is very important and may not cost you so much for great results ! 🙂

[Ben75]

18 minutes ago, bodiebill said:

Would the UPL also benefit from separate clean power, like the U?

Great question! ^^' @hopkins may wanna try this in the coming future? 😉

 

38 minutes ago, hopkins said:

Hi @Ben75, I don't recall the comparison with the Curious cable, but i trust we tried it - I guess it did not strike me as particularly beneficial?

 

@Norton, the ECD cables are a safe bet.

 

As for batreries, any 3.7v lithium battery will do. But it adds complexity: wiring, recharging... I am not sure it is really worth it, especially if you are using the U192 with a good source like the Bryston. 

We tried last time we were at your flat. I would say that it is not significantly beneficial - in plus of the very expensive price of the Curious Cable!

What do you mean by "I am not sure it is really worth it"? 🙂

 

@Norton, if you want to get this cable (https://www.ghentaudio.com/usb/u21.html) I think it may work at least as great as the ECD USB for a smaller price and different technology/configuration (dual headed, so potentialy less diaphonic issues compared to UC250). And ultimately it may help others to find the best USB cable? 🙂

[Ben75]

52 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

Just the practical aspects of using battery supply have to be weighed against the slight benefit they may provide...

Have you already tried about powering the U192 through a battery wcoupled with a charging dock? How does it sound?

[Ben75]

I hope you will be able to make the UPL96 work greatly with USB Y-cable ! 🙂

[Ben75]

According to what @hopkins  (Stéphane) said, it was a great moment to evaluate the level of performance the UPL96 + Fractal DAC has reached.

 

I will only state that (which doesn't reduce the qualities of the Denafrips Terminator) : UPL96ETL + Fractal DAC was so much better (in terms of qualitative jump/new paradigm) than the Terminator + SOTM. With the UPL96 + Fractal DAC we had the impression of a natural sound, effortless, non-fatiguing, ample sounding, life-like tonality, deep silence soundstage etc... Like vinyl record usually apparently do (in others opinions).

 

I would suspect the SOTM SMS 200 ultra and all the tweakes affiliated to be very poor compared to the UPL96ETL. @bodiebill : We should certainly borrow your SDTrans384 SD transport to get a good idea of the fabulous potential of the Denafrips Terminator - even though this DAC will always appear too much expensive for a lot of people.

 

Wan't wait to the launch of the PowerDAC...

 

 

I wish you a good dsunday!

Benoît

 

Ps : The Fractal DAC + UPL96 combo forces us to be humble and to revisit what is efficiently the so-called "High End Hifi"... I am confident that EC Designs is going in the right direction and has achieved a truely revolutionnary solution with this combo.

 

[Ben75]

1 hour ago, mevdinc said:

I am eagerly waiting for the PowerDAC, but becoming a bit frustrated as there's no news available on its eventual availability. :) 

I had shortlisted Mola Mola Tambaqui, dCS Bartok and Terminator Plus amongst others as my next DAC candidates until I came across ECdesings and this great topic.
Thanks for generously sharing your experiences.

Stay safe and enjoy listening.
 

@mevdinc : You are perfectly right I would say.. EC Designs Power DAC will be a no brainer : far less expensive than a Terminator or a Tambaqui and potentially better (because it will solve issues coming from complex analogic chain (preamp, amp, etc.).. Wait and see - but you are on the right thread if you want to get a guenuine Hifi experience IMO! :-)

[Ben75]

12 hours ago, mevdinc said:

My bad. Thanks for the clarification Matt.

Last parenthesis about the PowerDAC - in order to avoid any misunderstanding:

 

What are the difference between DA96ETF and PowerDAC, accordin to John?

"Output voltage is now increased from +/-1V8 to +/-9V. Output impedance dropped from 375 Ohms (DA96ETF) to 1.7 Ohms (PowerDAC).

And now I can connect speakers directly to the output as there is enough output power (6W rms)."

 

PowerDAC will output 6Watts RMS which is a lot! John has a 90dB loudspeakers and the PowerDAC can drive much less efficient loudspeakers - especially in the bridged version that he would expect ot launch in the same time (late 2021) and that wil output 12W RMS.

 

And here is John's feedback about the power of this beast :

"At maximum voltage (+/-9V) it plays -very- loud, so loud I need hearing protection and this is only 2 x 6W rms. The final bridged output version offers 2 x 12W rms. The DC coupled circuit offers subsonic bass (below 20 Hz). At low voltage setting power consumption drops to 30W (stereo)."

 

So to avoid any misconception : the PowerDAC should be very capable to drive almost anything on the market...

@mevdinc : when the PowerDAC will be launched you may certainly give a try to the PowerDAC as it may be better than any active loudspeakers. (but the limit of this statement is that I have not heard the PowerDAC and don't know if this will fulfill our sonic expectations) Since then, if you could afford ot give a try to the UPL96ETL and Fractal DAC I would recommend you to do so. You won't regret it!

To anybody who will try to contradict me : I have heard one of the best active loudspeakers : the Kii Three + BXT (30,000 euros the pack). Despite its excellent reviews and success in the mastering sector, I could definitely say that the UPL96ETL + DA96ETF is far better than the previous solution. PowerDAC should be logicaly better than active loudspeakers as well as UPL96 + Fractal DAC combo. :-)

 

Now... let's focus on the DA96ETL and DA96ETF that are really masterpieces..

[Ben75]

2 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

Useful indeed to read that link over again. 

 

My interest in that future development stemmed from my personal findings when experimenting with various setups, using the UPL (substitute here the U192 if you feel you have a good source to pair it with) and Fractal DAC. 

 

As John Brown explains, the benefits of the ECD source can easily be destroyed by poor amplification. And testing various amplification give surprising results... 

 

I have recently spend quite some time comparing 3 amplifiers: Lavardin ISX integrated amplifier, AudioPhonics Purifi amplifier, and ECD's own monoblocs (no longer sold). The best, by far, consists in using the ECD amplifiers directly connected to the DAC (no preamp). 

 

I used an excellent recording to test this, which also happens to be recorded at low volume, so you can play it at close to normal  listening volume without a preamp and with an amp that does not offer too much gain. This is what Arthur Salvatore refers to as the "Bolero Test". 

 

This is the recording: https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/49785/Bill_Berry_and_His_Ellington_All-Stars-For_Duke-CD

 

I am totally sold on the idea of the PowerDAC concept to provide low distortion "amplification" (though not in a traditional sense). 

 

The Purifi amplifier, for example, has an initial "wow" factor, but in spite of the stellar measurements, just does not provide a lifelike reproduction. I tested it with various preamps as well as without a preamp on its low-gain setting. 

 

The Lavardin is a good amp, but introduces distortion (in spite of its "low distortion" claims). Could be the preamp section that is inferior - no way of knowing. If you have heard nothing else, the Lavardin is still quite good, and gives a sense of "texture" as compared to lesser amps. 

 

The ECD amp has the best transparency IMO. When comparing the ECD amp without a preamp, on one hand, and with the ECD SVC preamp at maximum volume, on the other, you realize that the SVC introduces some degradation in sound quality as well (it is a good volume pot, but just that). Could be the added interconnect cables. But I also compared the ECD amps in the same way using the HorneShoppe's "The Truth" preamp, using the same interconnects, and they offer the maximum fidelity. Really lifelike and dynamic sound (within the limits of my modest speakers). 

 

I wish I had some really good tube amplification to carry out further comparisons, but I don't. 

 

So I am really curious to hear how this PowerDAC concept will enhance the fidelity even further. 

 

All this is only possible, IMO, due to the high quality of the ECD source. 

 

According to my ears... I would say that the Lavardin was very disappointing and killed the transparency of the sound.

 

The SVC24 is quite good but not excellent, like the preamp "The Truth".

ECD PurIFI amplifier was not great at all I would say.. It can give some impressions of transparency but it never deliver the musicality we expect (poor timbres, tension in the sound, no coherence of the soundstage etc.).

I quote John :

"High frequencies are the enemy of every (digital) audio set. Using a SMPS plus a digital amplifierplus a DAC (sample frequency) is asking for the big troubles. Other problems with digital amplifiers are the comparator circuit (resolution, hysteresis, jitter), global feedback loop issues (time smearing effects), the power output stage (switching properties, propagation delay cross conduction issues) and the required imperfect passive low-pass filter

The very best linear power amplifiers are already highly problematic and these don't have all the disadvantages of a digital amplifier."

 

Or :

"My -personal- opinion about class D amps, not suitable for audiophile applications. Constant voltage steering is used and that results in unwanted speaker distortion. PWM introduces related distortion spectrum and a powerful switching noise spectrum. Class D amps internal clock must be synchronised with the clock of the digital audio source, if not inter-modulation occurs. Supply voltage must be -extremely- constant and totally free of any ripple voltage as this would change the PWM signal energy content and related output voltage. Clock needs to have -extremely- low jitter or we get similar jitter issues like with the DAC (DAC jitter issues multiplied by class D amplifier jitter issues).
The often applied comparator circuit (compares reference sawtooth or triangle clock with the analogue input signal) has limited resolution because of required hysteresis (to keep the comparator stable). The comparator also introduces more jitter. The required passive low-pass filter at the output will never be perfect and will introduce more (phase) distortion. The low-pass filter will interfere with the complex load (speaker) causing more distortion. Class D amps are very useful when saving power is most important and sound quality doesn't matter that much."

 

From my own experience (I have own a "great" Class D integrated amp from Goldnote over the past years) : what John say is correct.