ECdesigns

Norton · January 31

Anyone paired one of the current crop of ECD DACs with the UPL96ETL?

I’m still enjoying mine with the DA96 of same vintage and put a significant part of the SQ down to the UPL. Wondered how it sounded with latest gen DACs.

bodiebill · February 3

The PowerDAC-SC arrived last Wednesday. It is a special device indeed. The thought that it could in theory make my current DAC, preamp and power amp redundant feels wondrous and strange. It would mean a reduction of a lot of space and of 90% of the current weight (60 kg becomes 6 kg). Surely it cannot sound as good as that heavy rig? Well, do not be mistaken.

I am used to long break in times (hundreds of hours with a previous Audio-GD DAC f.i.), but for some reason I was not expecting any for the SX. But yes, there was the initial disappointment as usual. Not being able to cope with complex orchestral passages and stridency in the first hour of playing. However, already that same evening things vastly improved and I could hear how special the SX is. If the heavy rig sounds more lush, saturated, even intoxicating, with the SX the sound signature is more aristocratic, pure, and with cleaner bass. I compared it to looking through a just-cleaned window. As a consequence I also find the SX less forgiving for badly recorded or -mastered material. However, for now and for me, it is not a question of better or worse, as both rigs sound great. I will keep them both for now and will compare them without hurry.

The second day the SX had settled nicely and the stridency (with f.i. high classical strings) had gone. I think I notice however that the SX -- apart from some break in -- also needs to warm up for half an hour or so to give its best. Did any of you experience this?

An initial slight worry was that on some material I needed to go up to 24/24 to get the required sound pressure. But I realized that is partly due to the fact that I apply convolution, which attenuates the original to ensure headroom and avoid clipping. Luckily, I can decrease this pre-attenuation, which is fine for properly constructed correction filters. Therefore, by now, I do not expect a problem to get enough juice from the SX for my Wolf von Langa SON speakers.

The attenuation steps are OK for me, no need to go finer. There is an odd doubling of volume (as confirmed by John) after changing each step, but this is so short (a small fraction of a second) that this presents no problem to the speakers or my ears.

Of course I also tried with pure bitperfect playback. However without convolution both the frequency response and (more importantly) the soundstage lack coherence, and instrument placement becomes less precisely defined. It all just sounds less natural, as if my brain continuously has to decide whether to listen to the left or to the right ('ping pong effect'), whereas with proper convolution the soundstage becomes fully detached from the speakers.

I tried a few Toslink cables and thought I could hear some differences. I chose the one I liked best, even though this was not capable (or only intermittently so) to do PCM192. In the meantime I ordered, based on a positive user review on another forum:
https://www.sysconcept.ca/product_info.php?products_id=364

For power, I reterminated a Vovox Excelsus power cable with a good quality C7 (figure 8) connector. This cable is not shielded but with the relative immunity to noise of the optical connection and the further elimination of cable spaghetti, I expect this to be no problem. My only qualm is that the C8 power socket and the Toslink receptacle are so close together, that with the larger C7 this hinders swapping the optical cable (which I have to do to switch between audio and video).

I successfully connected 3 subs. No problem there. I did notice that I needed to decrease their volume a notch as the SX delivers a strong (precise!) bass.

Regarding source immunity:

With my Rose RS130 streamer I first tried its internal clock and then with the external clock (Mutec Ref10 SE120). The latter sounded considerably better (blacker, more open and immersive, better bass). Next I tried the stock clocks vs the SC-Pure clocks in my DIY Ian Canada streamer, and again with the latter the SQ was clearly superior. No problem of course: I am reassured -- rather than disappointed -- that the SX is not source immune by a long stretch. (Actually I do know one or two source-immune DACs, but these sound equally bad in most configurations.)

I tried my two power hungry headphones (Heddphone ONE and Taket H2 + TR2) with the proper adapter (4x banana to 4-pin XLR) and they sound absolutely great. Volume setting was similar as for the speakers (15 to 22) The SX could be worth it as a dedicated headphone amp only.

Many devices nowadays come with a grounding post to connect an external grounding box, but not the SX. Any idea what a good connection point could be to try this?

Sorry for the long post, I just combined my notes...

Superdad · February 3

2 hours ago, bodiebill said:

The attenuation steps are OK for me, no need to go finer. There is an odd doubling of volume (as confirmed by John) after changing each step, but this is so short (a small fraction of a second) that this presents no problem to the speakers or my ears.

Nice report, but that behavior of the attenuator is VERY concerning. I have been considering purchase of a PowerDAC-RX, but bursts of volume when adjusting the level would be unacceptable to me.

bodiebill · February 3

1 hour ago, Superdad said:

Nice report, but that behavior of the attenuator is VERY concerning. I have been considering purchase of a PowerDAC-RX, but bursts of volume when adjusting the level would be unacceptable to me.

I admit that on paper it sounds disturbing. I was actually warned by another user before I bought it. However, when you actually hear it, it not a problem at all, really. At least not to me and the other owners (for as far as I know). I believe John chose not to change this behavior in order not to compromise SQ by doing so. His approach is purist. ECdesigns is not a brand to try to produce slick commercial status symbols but puts SQ first.

Actually what I like about this DAC is that it appears 'untuned'. Most 5 figure DACs are tuned to please the maker's sound preference. This can be done in many ways such as FPGA, opamps and tubes. John's approach is different. He chooses to minimize noise and jitter, not by tuning things but by omitting as much as possible, confident that the result will be right and musical. I think he has succeeded: to me the PD-SX emanates rightness to a high degree.

bodiebill · February 11

Still very happy with the PD-SX. Brief update:

I replaced the T2A fuse by a Synergestic Research Purple T2.5A fuse. Not sure whether I could hear the difference, but I did not try very hard.

Also, I non-invasively added two spades to the SX's rear feet that function as ground box connectors. I think that, with two 4kg boxes attached, I now hear a slightly blacker background.

The SX prompted me to change my convolution filters. The filters still address timing issues but are now only applied up to 200 Hz to mitigate room modes. The rest of the frequency spectrum is left alone. Also I managed to increase the volume of the resulting files without clipping, so all material can now be played at an attenuation setting between 14 and 23.

I called John to congratulate him on the SX. He is always very friendly and candid about his designs, although my technical knowledge is insufficient to understand everything he says. He did say that the SX's magic for the most part has to do with the omission of conventional amplification, so that it achieves more in that respect than the BX or RX.

When I told him of my results with different streamers and clocking, he admitted that sources can still make some difference, saying that "where there is data, there is noise" even applies to optical cables. He mentioned something about frequency bands, but I did not fully understand.

When I asked him about the UT192, het said that it could be wortwhile for me to try it, so I ordered one. If it makes no positive difference SQ wise, I can return it.

Perri · February 11

1 hour ago, bodiebill said:

Still very happy with the PD-SX. Brief update:

I replaced the T2A fuse by a Synergestic Research Purple T2.5A fuse. Not sure whether I could hear the difference, but I did not try very hard.

Also, I non-invasively added two spades to the SX's rear feet that function as ground box connectors. I think that, with two 4kg boxes attached, I now hear a slightly blacker background.

The SX prompted me to change my convolution filters. The filters still address timing issues but are now only applied up to 200 Hz to mitigate room modes. The rest of the frequency spectrum is left alone. Also I managed to increase the volume of the resulting files without clipping, so all material can now be played at an attenuation setting between 14 and 23.

I called John to congratulate him on the SX. He is always very friendly and candid about his designs, although my technical knowledge is insufficient to understand everything he says. He did say that the SX's magic for the most part has to do with the omission of conventional amplification, so that it achieves more in that respect than the BX or RX.

When I told him of my results with different streamers and clocking, he admitted that sources can still make some difference, saying that "where there is data, there is noise" even applies to optical cables. He mentioned something about frequency bands, but I did not fully understand.

When I asked him about the UT192, het said that it could be wortwhile for me to try it, so I ordered one. If it makes no positive difference SQ wise, I can return it.

Any pictures ? and what streamers and clocking are you using ? and with which streamers and clocking did you notice differences ?

bodiebill · February 11

15 minutes ago, Perri said:

Any pictures ? and what streamers and clocking are you using ? and with which streamers and clocking did you notice differences ?

The rack got emptier :-) However I am now using my other DAC (Leaf Audio CMD27) and power amp (Reimyo KAP-777) as an oversized headphone rig to provide enough juice for my power greedy TakeT headphones.

For streamers/clocking see my previous post of Feb 3.

And forgot to say: I use 3 Ungnoi anti-vibration feet.

matthias · February 11

1 hour ago, bodiebill said:

I use 3 Ungnoi anti-vibration feet.

Hi @bodiebill

nice system!

Two questions:

1.) Where can I get the Ungnoi feet?

2.) Can you use the highest volume level (24/24) of the SX or is there some distorsion/clipping?

If you can use 24/24, how loud is then the volume level impression in the room?

Thank you

bodiebill · February 11

9 minutes ago, matthias said:

nice system!

Thx :-)

9 minutes ago, matthias said:

1.) Where can I get the Ungnoi feet?

https://audiotweaks.nl/ungnoi/

9 minutes ago, matthias said:

2.) Can you use the highest volume level (24/24) of the SX or is there some distorsion/clipping?

If you can use 24/24, how loud is then the volume level impression in the room?

There is no distortion. And clipping cannot be introduced at that stage I believe.

Given that so far I can play everything up to 23 implies that 24 is too loud for me, but take into account that I am using convolution. Without that, I would probably not go above 19 or 20. I have no neighbours so tend to play pretty loud, but certainly not extremely loud. I wonder whether I ever get above 80 dB at listening position.

Perri · February 12

15 hours ago, bodiebill said:

The rack got emptier :-) However I am now using my other DAC (Leaf Audio CMD27) and power amp (Reimyo KAP-777) as an oversized headphone rig to provide enough juice for my power greedy TakeT headphones.

For streamers/clocking see my previous post of Feb 3.

And forgot to say: I use 3 Ungnoi anti-vibration feet.

Yes I noticed similar sound improvement in regards to streamer and source . It definitely is not immune and is source dependant . I am also using Ian Canada products and will most likely upgrade to UC Pure clocks .

Perri · February 12

17 hours ago, bodiebill said:

Still very happy with the PD-SX. Brief update:

I replaced the T2A fuse by a Synergestic Research Purple T2.5A fuse. Not sure whether I could hear the difference, but I did not try very hard.

Also, I non-invasively added two spades to the SX's rear feet that function as ground box connectors. I think that, with two 4kg boxes attached, I now hear a slightly blacker background.

The SX prompted me to change my convolution filters. The filters still address timing issues but are now only applied up to 200 Hz to mitigate room modes. The rest of the frequency spectrum is left alone. Also I managed to increase the volume of the resulting files without clipping, so all material can now be played at an attenuation setting between 14 and 23.

I called John to congratulate him on the SX. He is always very friendly and candid about his designs, although my technical knowledge is insufficient to understand everything he says. He did say that the SX's magic for the most part has to do with the omission of conventional amplification, so that it achieves more in that respect than the BX or RX.

When I told him of my results with different streamers and clocking, he admitted that sources can still make some difference, saying that "where there is data, there is noise" even applies to optical cables. He mentioned something about frequency bands, but I did not fully understand.

When I asked him about the UT192, het said that it could be wortwhile for me to try it, so I ordered one. If it makes no positive difference SQ wise, I can return it.

I think your Ian Canada product will most likely be better . I had an older version of the UT192 and the Ian Canada gear sounds better .

bodiebill · February 12

5 hours ago, Perri said:

I think your Ian Canada product will most likely be better . I had an older version of the UT192 and the Ian Canada gear sounds better .

The streamer and UT192 have different functions so hard to compare. The UT192 just converts USB to either Toslink or ElectroTos. It requires something like a streamer before it. Or maybe you had the U192ETL? That was a different beast. ECD device names are not very intuitive :-)

By the way, I usually use my streamers in stand alone mode, i.e. playing from a local drive. In the case of the Rose this is the mounted SSD, and in the case of the Ian Canada stack a ramdisk created with GentooPlayer. When playing an album, the (fiber) ethernet cable can even be disconnected, but this does not make much of a difference anymore as no audio data travel over it.

This a pic of my DIY streamer with the lid off. To its right are two boxes that provide USB isolation (USB > fiber > USB) and that I could try together with the UT192.

Varinder · February 16

Does your Ian Canada 🇨🇦 streamer has toslink ouput or how are you connecting it to DAC please

matthias · February 23

On 2/11/2024 at 11:02 AM, bodiebill said:

When I asked him about the UT192, het said that it could be wortwhile for me to try it, so I ordered one. If it makes no positive difference SQ wise, I can return it.

Did you get it.......and does it make a positive difference?

What about ElectroTos vs Toslink SQ wise?

Thx

uber2 · February 23

Anybody looking for ut192, I have one like new complete set. With factory electrotos, usb and optical cable.

Owned the U192etl before, and this one sounded better.

asking 250euro, retail 400euro.

bodiebill · February 24

13 hours ago, matthias said:

Did you get it.......and does it make a positive difference?

What about ElectroTos vs Toslink SQ wise?

Thx

Yes, and here it made a subtle positive difference in terms of SQ. But note that my USB is isolated via a two-box converter, so it is

streamer > USB > fiber > USB > UT192 > Toslink or ElectroTos > PD-SX

In the meantime I have substituted the UT192 with a customized UT96 with ET as well as Toslink output (kindly sent to me for comparison by John and Gordon). The theory is that the latter is less noisy, but the difference in SQ is very small. I must have been bewitched by the ECD sorcerers as they have turned an avid DSD adapt into a modest PCM96 guy :-)

I prefer my Canadian Toslink cable to the stock ElectroTos. However I am talking to an audio buddy (who used to contribute to this thread) about the possibility of making a custom ElectroTos with better (but not too heavy!) coax cable.

bodiebill · February 26

On 2/16/2024 at 2:55 AM, Varinder said:

Does your Ian Canada 🇨🇦 streamer has toslink ouput or how are you connecting it to DAC please

Sorry, missed this one...

I have an HdmiPi Pro as well as a TransportPi AES module. The former only does hdmi/I2S and the latter spdif RCA, BNC and optical. In theory you can use both in one stack but due to space limitations (height) I choose one depending on my setup. It is quite easy to swap them.

Currently I use optical out to the PD-SX.

Perri · March 7

Using a basic cheap shit Chinese peramp with the Power DAC and it's the best I have ever heard it .

As driven by itself in my opinion the Power DAC just does not sound as good as open and dynamic .

There is a tiny bit of hum but either this is a great pedence match or pure ass luck that they got this to sound so good for $240 AUD .

bodiebill · March 9

On 3/7/2024 at 1:16 PM, Perri said:

Using a basic cheap shit Chinese peramp with the Power DAC and it's the best I have ever heard it .

As driven by itself in my opinion the Power DAC just does not sound as good as open and dynamic .

There is a tiny bit of hum but either this is a great pedence match or pure ass luck that they got this to sound so good for $240 AUD .

Nice! Which PowerDAC are you using?

yogibear · March 9

Tube Preamp surely helps with B or BX. I crafted my own, based on a single 6SN7GT.

Perri · March 10

22 hours ago, bodiebill said:

Nice! Which PowerDAC are you using?

DAC BX

Perri · March 10

22 hours ago, yogibear said:

Tube Preamp surely helps with B or BX. I crafted my own, based on a single 6SN7GT.

Nice .

Ever tried the magical mystical Directly Heated Triode that people say sounds amazing ?

yogibear · March 10

Handcrafted four tube preamps till date. From left: First is Output transformer coupled 6SN7 tube preamp, Second is Capacitor coupled 6SN7 tube preamp, both are Jack Elliano, Electra Print Audio designs, often used in recording studios.

Third is Re084 DHT Preamp, Fourth is 6GF7 SRPP tube preamp, both are tube rectified and my own designs.

All four play with B and BX and mate well with tube and SS amps.

Pretty hard to chose one over the other. It’s all about the execution and not just the tubes.

Perri · March 12

On 3/11/2024 at 12:46 AM, yogibear said:

Handcrafted four tube preamps till date. From left: First is Output transformer coupled 6SN7 tube preamp, Second is Capacitor coupled 6SN7 tube preamp, both are Jack Elliano, Electra Print Audio designs, often used in recording studios.

Third is Re084 DHT Preamp, Fourth is 6GF7 SRPP tube preamp, both are tube rectified and my own designs.

All four play with B and BX and mate well with tube and SS amps.

Pretty hard to chose one over the other. It’s all about the execution and not just the tubes.

I do like tube rectified a lot for some reason .

So no DHT preamps .

Do the Electra Print Audio designs come in kits ?

yogibear · March 12

Third from the left is DHT and is tube rectified. Uses Re084 Zenith DHT tubes.

Jacks preamps do not come as kits but fully built.

ECdesigns

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in