ECdesigns

[realDHT]

1 minute ago, hopkins said:

 

To clarify, does that relate to the "source immunity" debate in your opinion ? Seems this is a different aspect (cable quality for 192), and that last sentence may be misinterpreted... 

Hehe I was just joking Hopkins 😁

But you are right, it may be misinterpreted.

 

My position is the same as before, the cable should not affect the sound (as long as the transmission works).

Although I did not test this for SQ with the PD. 

 

WIth the older DACs it for sure makes sense that toslink cables are important for SQ.

 

 

[bodiebill]

53 minutes ago, hopkins said:

To clarify, does that relate to the "source immunity" debate in your opinion ? Seems this is a different aspect (cable quality for  > 96khz), and that last sentence may be misinterpreted... 

 

Agreed. Source immunity presupposes the sources to be bitperfect and a cable that maxes at 96 negates that. So I do not see these max frequency differences as proof of source dependence.

 

Sound differences between cables on the other hand -- provided all is bitperfect -- do seem to reveal some source dependence.

[Huubster]

On 8/12/2021 at 8:05 PM, realDHT said:

The Powerdac-r consists of 2 circuit boards. The lower board is the DAPI, then the DAC board is stacked on top of it with connectors. I did not touch the DAC board, only the DAPI board and externals (enclosure, added attenuator, added masterclock etc) was modified This is how the original DAPI board looks.  

 

Since you went all balistic on your PD, I have a question for you if I may so 🙂

 

A friend of mine has the PD too and he did a fairly simple mod by exchanging those two huge browns caps on the above picture with well known versions from Elna Silmic ii Gold (Gold = Japanese making).

 

He's quitte shocked by how much the sound changed, actually improved to his opinion. You went through all the trouble of completely modding the PD, have you ever contemplated about doing this type of mod yourself?  

 

I have a few of those Japanese Silmic ii on order coming from China and will try it for myself as well, but it will take some time before I get them.

 

By the way, the 16v 10.000uf of Silmic versions are way too big to fit, my friend replaced them with 1.000uf Silmic versions, which actually have the same size as the brown 10.000uf versions. 

[yogibear]

10 minutes ago, Huubster said:

 

Since you went all balistic on your PD, I have a question for you if I may so 🙂

 

A friend of mine has the PD too and he did a fairly simple mod by exchanging those two huge browns caps on the above picture with well known versions from Elna Silmic ii Gold (Gold = Japanese making).

 

He's quitte shocked by how much the sound changed, actually improved to his opinion. You went through all the trouble of completely modding the PD, have you ever contemplated about doing this type of mod yourself?  

 

I have a few of those Japanese Silmic ii on order coming from China and will try it for myself as well, but it will take some time before I get them.

 

By the way, the 16v 10.000uf of Silmic versions are way too big to fit, my friend replaced them with 1.000uf Silmic versions, which actually have the same size as the brown 10.000uf versions. 

Very interesting but isn’t lower capacitance not recommended according to the design ?

 

This is unsettling for me as I never wanted to mod mine …..

[realDHT]

11 minutes ago, Huubster said:

 

Since you went all balistic on your PD, I have a question for you if I may so 🙂

 

A friend of mine has the PD too and he did a fairly simple mod by exchanging those two huge browns caps on the above picture with well known versions from Elna Silmic ii Gold (Gold = Japanese making).

 

He's quitte shocked by how much the sound changed, actually improved to his opinion. You went through all the trouble of completely modding the PD, have you ever contemplated about doing this type of mod yourself?  

 

I have a few of those Japanese Silmic ii on order coming from China and will try it for myself as well, but it will take some time before I get them.

 

By the way, the 16v 10.000uf of Silmic versions are way too big to fit, my friend replaced them with 1.000uf Silmic versions, which actually have the same size as the brown 10.000uf versions. 

Yep I already changed those too, you can see the new ones at some of the modpics I posted. I used a Nippon Chemcon, a little longer but fits well anyway. There is also a good Nichicon that will fit, but that one was out of stock when I ordered. I could check the particular models when I have more time. 

 

Intresting to hear about someone who did the same. I cannot really say anything about how this particular caps changed sound since I made 1000 mods at the same time :)  

 

  

[realDHT]

6 minutes ago, yogibear said:

Very interesting but isn’t lower capacitance not recommended according to the design ?

 

This is unsettling for me as I never wanted to mod mine …..

Yep I agree it is a bit chancetaking to change value that much, since John choses his values with great care. 

 

I had some idea to parallel those caps with a much smaller highquality type, and see what effect that might give.  

  

[realDHT]

@hubsand

Ah I read more in detail now, so do you mean that it was the 1000uF change your friend was comparing and was happy about?

 

In that case I might try something like that too.   

[Huubster]

11 minutes ago, realDHT said:

Yep I already changed those too, you can see the new ones at some of the modpics I posted.

 

I did check a few of your pictures on this,  but aparently not the latest ones then :) 

 

[realDHT]

2 minutes ago, Huubster said:

 

I did check a few of your pictures on this,  but aparently not the latest ones then :) 

 

I checked and actually all pics show the new ones. For example

[Huubster]

3 minutes ago, realDHT said:

@hubsand

Ah I read more in detail now, so do you mean that it was the 1000uF change your friend was comparing and was happy about?

 

In that case I might try something like that too.   

 

Yes, that's the scenario, besides using a brand which is known for it's audiophile sound characterisctics, he also uded 1.000uf instead, also due to size restrictions.

 

I'm not technical, but my friend did measurements and took this educated guess based on his extensive experience with these kind of tweaks. He measured only 2v there, so the 16v might already be a bit much in the first place.

[Huubster]

4 minutes ago, realDHT said:

I checked and actually all pics show the new ones. For example

You are right, I didn't look close enough. I was comparing those to the pictures hopkins posted a while back, and both looked brownish.. :)

 

My friend had another brand of caps in his PD by the way, so the PD's are not fully consistent.

[realDHT]

Its max 5V over those, but then 16V are probably chosen for good reasons anyway, lika a lower ESR or other reasons.

 

Just be aware that sometimes strange unexpected things might happen with such changes..since only John knows the details of the design.

 

For example John mentioned that my clockmod might be casing my problems with the highest samplerate (because of frequency drift)

[Vincent des Champs]

Just now, realDHT said:

Its max 5V over those, but then 16V are probably chosen for good reasons anyway, lika a lower ESR or other reasons.

 

Just be aware that sometimes strange unexpected things might happen with such changes..since only John knows the details of the design.

 

For example John mentioned that my clockmod might be casing my problems with the highest samplerate (because of frequency drift)

I asked John for his suggestion for a proper caps upgrade and I will report back his answer.

[Vincent des Champs]

3 hours ago, Vincent des Champs said:

I asked John for his suggestion for a proper caps upgrade and I will report back his answer.

Quick GoogleTranslate of John’s comprehensive answer (in bold the highlights for potential improvements):

———

 Hi Vincent,

 I use good quality capacitors and chosen for a specific application.  I use an LCR meter to measure and compare all parameters of capacitors.

 The capacitors were chosen based on measurements and listening tests.

 The value of the large capacitors on the side of the S/PDIF DAPI receiver must be 10000uF or higher, the purpose is mainly to filter out low frequency interference, hence the high value.

 The voltage must be 16V (even if it says max. 4.4V) because higher voltage gives a lower ESR.  lower ESR = less distortion.
 The Fractal D/A converter board and S/PDIF DAPI receiver board contain very high-quality and very expensive Polymer Tantalum capacitors with -extremely- low ESR.  These are located at the latch chips (sample timing) and at the MOSFET power switches.  These are the very best electrolytic capacitors I could find for this application.

 Compact design is also important, a connection that is too long can destroy the low ESR of the decoupling capacitor.  That's why I built everything so compact without wiring (piggyback boards and connectors soldered directly to the board).

 Electrolytic Capacitors in the PowerDAC-R:

 - Samwa RD or Nichicon FW(M), 10000uF/16V, comparable specs.  ESR = 80 milli Ohms.  Nichicon UKA is also suitable.  Potential improvement could be achieved by using an even greater capacitance (15000uF or 22000uF).

 - Kemet / Vishay Polymer tantalum capacitors, 220uF/6.3V and 33uF/6.3V.  ESR = 10 ... 20 milli Ohms.

 When tweaking, you quickly run the risk of adjusting the DAC to the distortion of a certain audio set (audible).  If you connect this DAC to another set, the sound may be disappointing.  So if you are going to tweak, you have to be 100% sure that the audio set offers a high degree of transparency and that the digital audio source delivers bit-perfect playback (a problem with Windows systems).

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

@Vincent des Champs

@Huubster

@bodiebill

 

Since there are a few of you around Amsterdam and you know each other it would be a good opportunity to organize a blind test and share your findings here. Perhaps you know other people who could participate as well? It is best also  to include people who do not already have their mind set on this as you all do. 

 

These things are not so easy to organize but I think ECD deserves a little more effort on our part... 

I will try to organize one here in Paris with some friends.

 

The way I see things, two sources should be compared, using the powerDAC and another (high-end) DAC. If the two sources can be reliably guessed with another DAC but not with the PowerDAC then we can conclude that the powerDAC achieves source immunity, and end this debate.  To drive the nail in the coffin, the two DACs can also be compared blinded with the "best source" (resulting from the first comparison with the other DAC) to make sure that the powerDAC does not actually lower the overall quality of the source, as has been suggested here. 

 

 

[matthias]

15 hours ago, hopkins said:

The way I see things, two sources should be compared, using the powerDAC and another (high-end) DAC. If the two sources can be reliably guessed with another DAC but not with the PowerDAC then we can conclude that the powerDAC achieves source immunity, and end this debate.  

 

To end this debate you would want a comparison of say a basic laptop to a real TOTL source like the best Laufer Memory Player or a Taiko Extreme.

 

Matt

[bodiebill]

52 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

To end this debate you would want a comparison of say a basic laptop to a real TOTL source like the best Laufer Memory Player or a Taiko Extreme.

 

Matt

 

Unless of course two sources closer together (f.i. the same PC with or without a high end power cable, or two different bitperfect audio players on the same PC) already sound different.

[Khronos]

First: I apologize. It seems my previous theories were incorrect. Mr. Brown has seemingly chosen his caps well and I think the recordings may have clipped. Sorry for unknowingly misleading.

 

I'm curious, what would make a Taiko Extreme a better source than, say, a Soundaware D300REF fed with an audiophile grade SSD? (Yes, it does in fact exist: https://www.zzyzxphile.com/)

 

In the end the Taiko is still a Windows machine fed with a fancy power supply and some BIOS modifications on an Asus motherboard... and non-buffered ECC Ram. Anyways! Not something out of the ordinary for a consumer (even the film cap PSU can be custom built somewhere). Wouldn't directly feeding the PD natively from the FPGA work better than having the information go through the this-that

of native OS filters plus converters?

 

Regardless of method used, the only way to completely erode any way for the source to sound different is, in my opinion, by having a chip being the master of a FPGA that directly servos the power supply with the binary of the storage (something I think ECD may be working towards). Though this brings out several hurdles related to how storage is partitioned and what that means for the metadata of the song (imagine a rewritable digital vinyl, there's only the ability to choose where to drop the needle but otherwise no way to know what's where.). Because otherwise there will be always processing on the raw data. I'm thinking that perhaps there could be two partitions: One holds only the metadata (song length, etc) and the other only the raw data (the song itself) and they are both driven in parallel. The interface works with the main chip in order to "drop the needle there" and the FPGA pulls out the information from where the chip is telling it to and regulates the PSU. Let's go all the way in and actually have it use two memories: A small one for the metadata, and a large one for the file stream. The first can be even a micro SD card, while the second a m.2 that is directly put on the main board.

 

Otherwise all data will go through one form or another of processing that will modify it as it goes through. Bitperfect and jitterless, yes, but also loaded with other crap, or cut-up much. Maybe I'm wrong again, and if that's the case, I apologize. I'm not an engineer, nor the person anybody should come to ask for advice when it comes to building anything analog or digital; rather I'm a teenager who loves music to a fault and whose favorite method to waste time is to research everything except what's useful through real life.

 

Post-data: If this is what ECD-follows, then I'll be beyond excited. This method could allow for modularity and future-proofing. PCM1536? You've probably got it. DSD1028? Got it too. Some other method we haven't thought of yet? Connect a jumper, plug the DAC to a laptop, flash the FPGA and you got it too. ECD found a better algorithm? Same thing. It would become an absolute swiss knife of a DAC, probably with the ability to even process DSP and Room correction parallel to the Data (so that it is externally processed before getting plugged straight into the FPGA). Maybe even the ability to drive speakers, RCA, XLR, etc? Sky's the limit. We are seeing almost everything here through other companies. Programable DSP through Analog Precision, on-the-fly updates from almost everyone, LTA and their MZ3 with the Preamp/speaker. ECD is on the knife's edge of a Pandora box that'll objectively end the necessity of separates for good, minimizing the variables to Speakers and Speaker cable (and perhaps, with added external inputs, down to flavoring (what PC program to flavor this with? Should I use XYZ DSP profile? What turntable and cartridge and ADC should I buy to play my vinyl with? Etc)). Possibilities are truly ridiculous.

[Huubster]

On 8/27/2021 at 6:48 PM, hopkins said:

@Vincent des Champs

@Huubster

@bodiebill

 

Since there are a few of you around Amsterdam and you know each other it would be a good opportunity to organize a blind test and share your findings here. Perhaps you know other people who could participate as well? It is best also  to include people who do not already have their mind set on this as you all do. 

 

These things are not so easy to organize but I think ECD deserves a little more effort on our part... 

I will try to organize one here in Paris with some friends.

 

I'm a bit puzzled by your comments lately Stephane. You are making it look like we don't appreciate ECD for what it is. The opposite is true, I loved the Fractal DAC and now the PD even more. But I don't let science dictate what I hear. 

 

You may not hear any difference in your setup, that's all fine with me. But here in Amsterdam that's different. And just stating that it's probably 'biased' listening, or that differences are caused by 'ground loops' due to different setups doesn't cut it for me. 

 

As you know I've been listening to all kinds of setups, but my own conclusions I only draw based on experience in my own setup, because that's the only setup I really 'know' good enough to draw any conclusions upon.

 

I already shared before that I love the PD with different sources, from 'cheap' to high-end. And that's a real merit of the PD, it makes simple audio sources sound great, I acknowledge that. The PD makes differences in source material small, but they are still there. I noticed that especially after listening to the Bluesound Node for over a week, and losing interest in listening after a while. After going back to my reference source I immediately noticed that I missed the emotional involvement I used to have. But it took me a week to realize that. 

 

And that is exactly the reason why:

1) I appreciate the PD so much, it's incredible accomplishment, but

2) I also think that a blind test doesn't make any sense.

 

It's in the finesses where the differences are, and those are hard, or next to impossible to identify in a blind test. 

 

I'm not here to convince anybody of something, this is just my take away after listening to the PD for quite some time. The way you are communicating lately is giving me the feeling that you are just not excepting that I hear the differences I hear, because you don't hear them yourself, supported by the theories of John. I'm sorry to say so, I normally appreciate your input very much, but that, to me, is not being open minded, something you seem to be accusing others of...

 

[Norton]

I’ve not heard the PD (sticking with the DA96ETF for now and waiting on the PD S) but it seems to me that the claim of source immunity (if that is what is claimed) is really overshadowing ECD’s uncontested and considerable achievements in other respects, thus:

 

a. is source immunity apparent to the listener?

 

b. if it is apparent, is that a good or bad thing, achieved by liberating or limiting the source? Some really poor DACs are likely also immune to source for the wrong reasons.  Another manufacturer might well promote  their DAC, with some credibility, on the opposite characteristic: warts and all transparency to source 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

@Huubster, I do not understand your comments.

 

I am not letting science dictate my hearing, but I do try to take a "scientific" approach when evaluating equipment.

 

The performance of a DAC is not always easy to assess, and I try to understand where differences can come from. Hence I have tested this DAC in a number of systems and configurations and with different people. It is clear that it does not always sound spectacular because it depends on the system used. 

 

I personally found that it performs best when used with headphones and explained why - funny in fact that I overlooked this initially. This (headphone listening) has been a real revelation for me and I am now looking forward to listening to the S model to see how much it will improve on the sound quality with loudspeakers. 

 

If used with speakers, I think that it is best to use the PD's volume control and not to rely on an external preamplifier, but that is more difficult to confirm as I have only tested it in a few configurations, and there are many out there. 

 

As for source immunity, it may not be "perfect" (please read over John's explanations) but if there remains some dépendance I honestly believe it is not significant, especially in light of the improved "accuracy" the DAC offers. Also, there are unfortunately some comments made here on this topic which IMO are not credible, and I have explained why. 

 

I perfectly understand that our experience could be different, but there should be  explanations for this  - it's not a question of personal preference and tastes. 

Please keep in mind that this is a public forum and that uninformed people (those who have not listened to the powerDAC or even previous ECD DACs) are quick to jump to conclusions (as we can see when they "approve" or "like" specific posts)  even though they have not even heard the product we are talking about! Words should be chosen carefully, because they do matter. 

 

 

 

[bodiebill]

Today, @Huubster and I came together, mainly to compare my previous DIY VH Audio Chela speaker cables with my new Fidelium speaker cables.

 

Having the opportunity (but not much time) we decided to also do a quick test of some sources using the PD. We used three configurations:

(1) PC with JRiver MC28 (bitperfect setting)

(2) PC with (Russian) Album Player (bitperfect setting)

(3) NUC with wtfplay

 

(1) and (2) were compared with @Huubster 'blindfolded'.

Differences between all three were audible in terms of openness, definition and detail, although our preferences were not the same: @Huubster preferred (1) to (2); I preferred (3) to (2) to (1).

 

I do agree that (3) and (2) can be harder to listen to with bad recordings, of which there are too many (TMI effect?).

 

Just sharing, not trying to proof anything.

[bodiebill]

2 hours ago, hopkins said:

@Huubster, I do not understand your comments.

 

I am not letting science dictate my hearing, but I do try to take a "scientific" approach when evaluating equipment.

 

The performance of a DAC is not always easy to assess, and I try to understand where differences can come from. Hence I have tested this DAC in a number of systems and configurations and with different people. It is clear that it does not always sound spectacular because it depends on the system used. 

 

I personally found that it performs best when used with headphones and explained why - funny in fact that I overlooked this initially. This (headphone listening) has been a real revelation for me and I am now looking forward to listening to the S model to see how much it will improve on the sound quality with loudspeakers. 

 

If used with speakers, I think that it is best to use the PD's volume control and not to rely on an external preamplifier, but that is more difficult to confirm as I have only tested it in a few configurations, and there are many out there. 

 

As for source immunity, it may not be "perfect" (please read over John's explanations) but if there remains some dépendance I honestly believe it is not significant, especially in light of the improved "accuracy" the DAC offers. Also, there are unfortunately some comments made here on this topic which IMO are not credible, and I have explained why. 

 

I perfectly understand that our experience could be different, but there should be  explanations for this  - it's not a question of personal preference and tastes. 

 

Please keep in mind that this is a public forum and that uninformed people (those who have not listened to the powerDAC or even previous ECD DACs) are quick to jump to conclusions (as we can see when they "approve" or "like" specific posts)  even though they have not even heard the product we are talking about! Words should be chosen carefully, because they do matter. 

 

Interesting that you prefer headphones for assessing DACs. It reminded me of this review of the Musician Aquarius DAC which was done with headphones as well as a speaker setup: 

https://soundnews.net/sources/dacs/musician-aquarius-r-2r-dac-review/

 

The reviewer writes:

In my opinion, some technicalities are much easier to spot in a top-of-the-line headphone setup, especially detail-retrieval, transparency, transient response and frequency response are a child’s play for something like a Hifiman Susvara being driven by a power amplifier (Yes, you’ve read that right). In a loudspeaker setup it is much easier determining its soundstage size, depth and pin-location (imaging) of all the musical notes and that is exactly why Aquarius DAC was used in two distinct setups.

 

and indeed he describes the soundstage qualities of this DAC as being less apparent with headphones. In the comments section below the review he is even advising someone who mostly listens to headphones not to buy this DAC.

[Norton]

The UPL96ETL is the best digital source I have owned to date.  To my ears the UPL/DA96ETF combo remains something very special, although just on the lean side of neutral in contrast to some accounts here of the PD R SQ.

 

Apologies, particularly to @hopkins,  if this has already been detailed somewhere back in this thread, but for those of you who had or still have access to the UPL/DA96ETF combo as well as the PD R, do you find both of the following statements to be true:

 

1. you cannot distinguish between the UPL96ETL and any other source when listening to the PD R; and
 

2. the UPL96 ETL sounds better with the PD R than with the DAC96ETF?

If there was a consensus agreeing with both of the above, to me that would be fairly convincing  that the PD R is source immune, for the right reasons and a step forward.

[bodiebill]

9 minutes ago, Norton said:

1. you cannot distinguish between the UPL96ETL and any other source when listening to the PD R

 

Negative. I can.

 

9 minutes ago, Norton said:

2. the UPL96 ETL sounds better with the PD R than with the DAC96ETF?

 

I can no longer try the latter combination but admit that I was never 100% sure that the PD-R was a big step up from the Fractal DAC. For me it certainly did not sound worse and has some practical advantages so I never looked back.