ECdesigns

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Pretty funny video ! 

[murphythecat87]

21 hours ago, matthias said:

 

I know this passage, tbh it appears to me not as a mature solution (but the proof is in the listening).

 

Matt

have you ever heard a ECD product?

once you do listen to one of his design, at the bare minimum you will understand that they are legit in term of SQ

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

I don't think Matthias doubts the legitamacy of ECD. We (I and perhaps, a few others) do come across as "fan boys" and it must be irritating for some. The opposite is true as well, as we can get irritated by comments that are percieved as too negative. At the end of the day, its just audio equipment we are talking about, and there is plenty to go around !

 

[mevdinc]

Surely the information the DAC designers are sharing must be respected, if you don't find their ideas or claims realistic or achievable then that's fine too. The proof is always in the listening, none should buy any equipment purely based on other user experiences. You should always listen and decide yourselves, that's what I do.

  Some of the members of this discussion group maybe seen as 'fan boys' and so be it, those who don't like the content or the claims can just move onto other topics and there are plenty on this Forum.
It's nice to read the experiences and opinions of others, that's the main purpose of this Forum, sharing our knowledge and experiences. 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

In that spirit, I am linking here Gavin1977's experience with the current DAC and U192, which he ended up returning: 

 

 

My experience, both in my system and in others', is of course different, but the point made about the power supply / source sensitivity is undeniable. I use a Farad 5v supply on the DA96, and I use the UPL (not the U192) exclusively (am very happy with the results) - things can probably still improve, and the UPL as well all know is "not for everyone".

 

Why does the UPL make a difference today, considering in both cases (UPL or U192) there is galvanic isolation through tosllink (ElectroTos) to the DAC ? My assumption is that the local playback and very low power (low noise) processor in the UPL on one hand, versus a PC connected to XMOS in the U192, generates different jitter in the signal output from those sources, but that's a guess. We know that every chip (including XMOS) produces noise, it does not only come from power supplies, the network, RF, etc.. 

 

ECD acknowledges these issues as well -  source sensitivity with the current DA96 is probably lower than in most DACs, but still not perfect. Here is what they wrote to me, in answer to a question on the power supply of their new product. I asked if I could quote them here, got no answer, so I assume it is ok to do so:

 

1) concerning the current DA96 DAC

 

"The DA96ETF was still based on a DIR9001 that recovers the S/PDIF clock and thus passes some of the incoming jitter to the D/A converter. So here the source is critical as you already noticed, and the power supply is also critical as it has direct impact on PLL (clock recovery) performance.

 

DIR9001 outputs I2S (what else, almost every digital audio chip has I2S interface). So I could not prevent related I2S spectrum from spreading across the DAC circuits. I do convert I2S to DAPI, but the generated I2S interference is already generated and won't go away. This all results in a critical system that responds to source and power supply quality just like with every other DAC.

The ElectroTOS low jitter protocol + ElectroTOS hybrid interlink help to minimise interlink related jitter and the low jitter audio clocks in the XMOS and UPL devices ensures that source jitter stays very low to begin with. The source noise spectrum has impact on clock recovery (DIR9001) and that's why a band limiter we added later improves performance as it helps the PLL to recover cleaner clock signals."

 

2) design of the PowerDAC

 

"Keep in mind that this is a unique DAC as it runs on an independent low jitter clock and the critical I2S interface (powerful RF noise source, big problem) has been completely removed. So this DAC has a true S/PDIF to parallel converter that has never been used in any existing DAC before.

 

The Power D/A converters have very heavy local decoupling, low esr decoupling caps for the MOSFET power switch chips, plus massive 10,000uF D/A converter supply decoupling. Because of this, the supply voltage is no longer critical, worst case it can cause very slow signal amplitude fluctuations (DAC plays slightly louder or weaker) when using a -very- poor or even unregulated  external 5V supply.

So we only need a good regulated voltage and the regulator doesn't have to be very special, a plain LM7805 will work perfectly here as power supply noise is completely filtered out by the local decoupling network inside the DAC (the supply voltage can only change very slowly now)."

Another point made by Gavin1997 is the lack of filtering on the DAC, which is also something they have addressed with the PowerDAC, but I don't have any specific info on this.

 

 

[Ben75]

3 hours ago, mevdinc said:

Surely the information the DAC designers are sharing must be respected, if you don't find their ideas or claims realistic or achievable then that's fine too. The proof is always in the listening, none should buy any equipment purely based on other user experiences. You should always listen and decide yourselves, that's what I do.

  Some of the members of this discussion group maybe seen as 'fan boys' and so be it, those who don't like the content or the claims can just move onto other topics and there are plenty on this Forum.
It's nice to read the experiences and opinions of others, that's the main purpose of this Forum, sharing our knowledge and experiences. 

I perfectly agree wwith you !

 

"It's nice to read the experiences and opinions of others, that's the main purpose of this Forum, sharing our knowledge and experiences. " That is the problem I was pointing out : Matthias speaks and denigrates things that he has never listened to.

 

I think he should just be respectful and humble. That could help ^^'

[Gavin1977]

Thanks for sharing @hopkins.  I will continue to follow the development of the PowerDAC with interest.  If you have the right set up then ECD Fractal DAC+U192ETF is pretty amazing - it's certainly a bargain.

 

It has opened my mind to other experiments as well - such as this: 

 

More to follow as I have tried some other combinations since then.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Thanks. I personally want to avoid going down that road again (tweaks, spaghetti...). But I'll be curious to follow all this. 

 

It feel that many DAC manufacturers seem to have given up on the idea of source immunity. The business of "source optimization" (servers, networks, cables, etc..) seems to have really taken over everything. On a French forum I have been following, for example, the use of this new Diretta protocol, which claims improvements in sound quality by changing the way network packets are send from a server to a player. You can see DAC manufacturers in Japan offering servers using this protocol. Are there benefits? Maybe. I won't be trying this to find out for myself, and it is impossible just by reading about it to know whether the sound is ultimately satisfying or whether the positive feedback is just hyperbole. You could of course say the same about everything written in this thread! 

 

Source and power supply immunity, however, should be fairly easy to check for oneself. So we can find out on that aspect if ECD is full of BS or not 😄 all you'll need is your current source and a "crappy" one ! Or basically take your source and remove all the spaghetti... The volume control aspect should also be easy to test (provided you have a preamp you like, or using the "Bolero test"). Once that is done, whether the DAC itself provides top quality sound or not is another story and it will be hard to gage just from reading people's opinions what the  end result is. I assume most people who currently own ECD gear will be curious to know whether it is better than their current DAC - others may remain skeptical, and that's the nature of the game.

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

One small correction to my last post, for those who currently own the Fractal DAC, and are wondering whether it will be relevant to "upgrade" to the PowerDAC: the DAC section remains the same (my understanding), so improvements in sound quality will really depend on this source/power supply immunity, on one hand, and the volume control/amplification on the other (depending on one's use - if using fixed outputs with an integrated amplifier, that will not be relevant). It is impossible to know now how much of an improvement that will make. 

 

I do expect to see better performance than the current UPL+DAC+upgraded power supply (what I use), as the signal will be "cleaner" (less jitter, less noise) but I don't expect it to be a "mind blowing" difference as I feel this combo's quality is already quite high. I expect it will be in line with past improvements (especially this "bandwidth limiter" version), with blacker background, better instrument separation and placement. These small differences do make listening more pleasurable, but I'm happy with the sound I am getting now (given my speakers/room). There's no obvious issue crying for an upgrade.

 

Though I have not used the U192 much lately, anytime I plug it back in I still notice a significant difference with the UPL that makes the UPL worthwhile for me in spite of its constraints. Contrary to the UPL which has me satisfied, there's often with the U192 something that bothers me and that does not sound quite "right" - perhaps distortion on some notes, or perhaps jitter affects the timing (and realism), and some fatigue after a while - difficult to describe. So differences may vary depending on the quality of the source, but I expect the benefit of the PowerDAC would be even higher if you currently use the U192, and it is an opportunity to simplify things.

 

I expect the volume control will offer a cleaner signal than their current SVC passive preamp, but I am not sure too many people currently use the SVC, so that comparison will be of less interest here.

 

For the "S" version, its a different ball game altogether, and I have no idea about that.

 

Will wait until we can learn more about the availability of these new products before I post again!

[M_audio]

Not sure if i can post it here, but i am not posting anywhere else. Since it is such a rarity - selling my EC Designs T16 NOS DAC with all the add-ons. Still top of the game. With XTOS (USB to optical converter) in the front of the DAC), you can actually see if your player is sending bit-perfect, since there is a light for that. It plays highly transparent. Put a better, fast power cable to its external LPSU, and you will get faster and tighter sound.

Goes up to 192 kHz. It plays 24bit as 17 bit, which is actually enough head-room for probly 98% of music. Contrary to popular opinion, the bits are not the resolution, the kHz determine the sampling resolution. The bits determine the dynamic space of the recording.  
As such, vinyl has less dynamics/bits from 16-17 bits. And some swear vinyl still sounds better. 
I spoke to recording and producing engineer who happened to be also a classical musician and a professor of a classical instrument at musical academy. He said one needs 24 bits only in the process of recording because they need bigger dynamic space for editing and manipulation. This sounded plausible to me with my IT knowledge.And most people cant really distinguish between 16 or 17 bits.

[guls]

5 hours ago, M_audio said:

Not sure if i can post it here, but i am not posting anywhere else. Since it is such a rarity - selling my EC Designs T16 NOS DAC with all the add-ons. Still top of the game. With XTOS (USB to optical converter) in the front of the DAC), you can actually see if your player is sending bit-perfect, since there is a light for that. It plays highly transparent. Put a better, fast power cable to its external LPSU, and you will get faster and tighter sound.

Goes up to 192 kHz. It plays 24bit as 17 bit, which is actually enough head-room for probly 98% of music. Contrary to popular opinion, the bits are not the resolution, the kHz determine the sampling resolution. The bits determine the dynamic space of the recording.  
As such, vinyl has less dynamics/bits from 16-17 bits. And some swear vinyl still sounds better. 
I spoke to recording and producing engineer who happened to be also a classical musician and a professor of a classical instrument at musical academy. He said one needs 24 bits only in the process of recording because they need bigger dynamic space for editing and manipulation. This sounded plausible to me with my IT knowledge.And most people cant really distinguish between 16 or 17 bits.

And the price?

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Maybe continue this discussion by private message? There's a "for sale" section in this forum as well... 

[tims]

On 1/20/2021 at 11:36 PM, bodiebill said:

For what it is worth, some people report great results feeding analogue signal into high-end active speakers such as Dutch and Dutch, Kii or Buchardt. These speakers obviously include ADC. These reports made me curious and I will receive Buchardt A500's for a 45-day trial period starting in February. Not sure yet how the ECD gear will fit in such a setup, but there are many possibilities and I will experiment...

Hi bodiebill

Did you receive your Buchardt A500's speakers as yet?  If so, how do they go matched with your ECD set-up?

Cheers

[bodiebill]

Not yet :-) Due to Buchardt's overwhelming success they were first postponed to last week, when I received the bad news from Mads Buchardt that mine did not pass quality control, which I am glad they take pretty seriously. The A500's are now expected end of May. Not a big problem for me as I just moved house and am still finding out where to place my gear for best SQ. Actually, I think I found it: best results so far with the speakers placed diagonally, i.e. on two sides of a room corner. So now I can refamiliarize myself with the sound for later comparison with Buchardt setup. Trial period is 45 days. I will post the results in due time. 

[mevdinc]

Any (insider) news on the PowerDAC? :)

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

9 minutes ago, mevdinc said:

Any (insider) news on the PowerDAC? :)

They are working hard at it (model -R) :) 

[mevdinc]

12 minutes ago, hopkins said:

They are working hard at it (model -R) :) 

No problem, as long as it's worth the wait. :)))
 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

45 minutes ago, mevdinc said:

No problem, as long as it's worth the wait. :)))
 

 

The technical explanations (given on their website R&D section and some added points here) are really interesting, though they are not always so easy to grasp ! I've done some reading on these topics recently, and what strikes me is how the very nuanced and cautious explanations that engineers give concerning digital audio sometimes translate into not so nuanced and cautious claims by the consumers (us) of these products (ex: reading recently that a product has "close to perfect galvanic isolation of the USB input"). So I'll remain cautious, and plan to give this new product, when it comes out, a full battery of tests/comparisons and have as many trusted ears as I can give their opinion about it.

 

As a result of their communication about this, I don't think too many people are buying their current products any longer (not that there were many to start with!), so that must be an incentive for them to come out with something fairly soon :)

 

[RickyV]

Is there any idea how much watt the powerdac will produce? Would be fantastic if i could use it for my Raal, 100w.

[Ben75]

8 hours ago, RickyV said:

Is there any idea how much watt the powerdac will produce? Would be fantastic if i could use it for my Raal, 100w.

I would say between 6WRMS and 40WRMS for a PowerDAC-R and the addition of a Buffer and a tube. :-) But we have to wait for more precise information from ECD...

[Ben75]

9 hours ago, hopkins said:

when it comes out, a full battery of tests/comparisons and have as many trusted ears as I can give their opinion about it.

Prem's ! ^^' I can't wait to give tjhe PowerDAC-R a try at your house Stéphane when it will be launched ! :-)

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

53 minutes ago, Ben75 said:

Prem's ! ^^' I can't wait to give tjhe PowerDAC-R a try at your house Stéphane when it will be launched ! :-)

 

Lol, are you experiencing cabin-fever from the confinement here in Paris ? 

 

https://www.medicaldaily.com/patience-virtue-374980

:)

 

 

 

[nattflax]

I have been reading the blog posts about the new DAC's from EC Designs. I find the information provided somewhat confusing. I don't understand why EC Designs can't explain in plain language their upcoming products, and then explain how playing or streaming is performed within the 'EC Designs-ecosystem' (I couldn't make up a better term) . 

 

I jotted down some comments/ thoughts on what information I derived from the blog, and what I found to be lacking or missing.

 

1. It's a dac that comes in two versions, with x features/ quirks for best possible audio quality. 

 

*One version is a traditional Dac with fixed output or variable output for a traditional HIFI-system The variable output is used to drive common headphones on the market.  [How to drive headphones is not explained in clear and concise manner on the website, merely that it is possible].

 

*The second version is used to drive speakers directly from source. The DAC is used as a power amplifier, thus mitigation sound degradation from a pre-amplifier used in traditional HIFI-systems with separates or an integrated amplifier.

2. Oh, that is cool. But wait what only Toslink?  How do I connect my xyz?

 

3. Explain the 'EC Designs-ecosystem' and what audio formats are supported and how they transmitted to the DAC. Especially, if there are new versions of UPL/ETL planned, or maybe something else? Yes, there is some information about this, but the blog makes a u-turn and starts to talk about the DAPI-interface. Is the DAPI a separate gadget or a feature in the DAC's? I don't know.

 

4. This is were I want to choose to read more technical stuff. Not first and not last either. Read our technical write-ups here. Read about our views on sound reproduction here.

 

5. Oh, you want specs? Read them below.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

@nattflax

 

Toslink is used because it is the only input that offers perfect galvanic isolation from the source.

 

There are disadvantages with Toslink, which are essentially linked to jitter in the incoming signal (either from the source, or  jitter added when the signal is passing through the optical cable). The previous DAC (DA96), did not "reclock" this jittery signal - it was a "slave" DAC that relied on the quality of the source signal. Also, this previous DAC used a standard chip (DIR9001) to decode the incoming signal, and this chip has some limitations as well (no need to go into details here, as this will no longer be used).

 

The PowerDAC has a completely different way of dealing with the incoming Toslink signal.

 

It has a "master clock", so it does not rely on the clock signal of the source, and it therefore "re-clocks" the incoming signal. The way it does this is novel, and has not been done before (at least according to ECD). They found a way to do it "asynchronously" (as with USB), so that clock and data signals remain "separate", in a sense (my very limited understanding) and this avoids noise spreading from one to the other... . So essentially only the "data" part of the Toslink signal is used, and the rest (clock signal) is discarded.  How is this all done ? John Brown explains it on a post in DIY Audio (here: https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/79452-building-ultimate-nos-dac-using-tda1541a-post6462689.html). The Toslink signal goes through a micro-controller's RAM buffer, and outputs parallel data using the clock's timing. I understand the sample rate is determined through an algorithm (not looking at the clock data either). Don't ask me more, this is all very complicated and relies on ingenious programming on their part. The parallel data output by this micro-controller has a very low-bandwidth - allowing for less "noise" (from the micro-controller, for example) to travel along with the data and spread into the DAC. Once again, this is my understanding, and a simplified interpretation.

 

The DAPI is the term they use to refer to this "decoding/re-clocking" process. It is part of the DAC. 

 

If you don't have a source that has a Toslink output, then you can use a small converter to generate a Toslink signal. There are many products available to do this, in all price ranges. Those who already have the U192 can use that.  I think they mentioned they may offer a small USB/Toslink converter, but I'm not sure. So the ECD "Ecosystem" will initially consist, from what I understand, of the PowerDAC and possibly a small converter for those who don't have a source with Toslink output. Will they continue selling the U192 and the UPL ? I don't know but I doubt it.

 

We'll have to see whether different sources still impact SQ, but the idea is that the sensitivity to source jitter will be greatly reduced. Personally, I use the UPL today, but will be happy to use something else if there is practically no difference in SQ.

 

The Toslink signal is max 24 bit / 192 kHz.

 

Hope this helps !

 

 

[nattflax]

Thank you @hopkins for your thorough and well-versed reply. It really helps me with my thought process, and understanding what ECD really is developing. 

 

Electro-engineering is quite hard to grasp for a novice like me. Thus, my plea for a more plainly written description first and then a "technical description" (for idiots like me), and last a real technical description aimed at engineers and alike.

 

Basically what you are saying and the information in the blog post from ECD is that usability has been improved through their own technical development without diverting from the toslink interface. Perhaps this is even a new "paradigm" in regards to their previous trade-off between usability/file formats and best possible sound quality. The new vertical design may indicate that they intend to ditch the UPL/ETL concept.

 

Although, the new technical development leaves a question mark how it will affect sound quality. Obviously, sound quality will not be bad.  Hopefully it is equal or better (when the new-product-dust settles) compared to previous products. From the blog I infer that technical developments is not a trade-off bewtween sound quality and usability. You are adopting a more wait-and-see approach.

 

My understanding of ECD as a company, is that they give a great deal of thought, and has the technical knowledge to mitigate adverse effects of high frequency noise and (intermodular) distortion on sound quality. This is what peaked my interest for ECD.

 

 

Quote

 [The]ECD "Ecosystem" will initially consist, from what I understand, of the PowerDAC and possibly a small converter for those who don't have a source with Toslink output.

This is great news for those who wish to use a usb-ouput from a computer or a Raspberri Pi with digital outputs. And possibly multiple sources through a splitter, or multiple inputs in the higher tier Power-S version.

 

Quote

\...\The DAPI is the term they use to refer to this "decoding/re-clocking" process. It is part of the DAC.

 

With your wording I understand that this is real technical development, as in lowering jitter by separating the data and clock stream in the toslink interface e.g. asynchronus-usb. Therefore lower the noise injected to the dac. Furthermore there is nifty low-level programming to determine sample rate and frequency in the data stream.

 

This also opens up the possibility to be more format agnostic. I love my MOS 16/UPL combo.The cleaning and washing my digital library when I want to play a new digital album is an endearing quirk. But I wouldn't mind copying some FLAC-files to a usb-thumbbdrive, or set up a streaming solution with a Raspberri-Pi. :)

 

Quote

The parallel data output by this micro-controller has a very low-bandwidth - allowing for less "noise" (from the micro-controller, for example) to travel along with the data and spread into the DAC.

This is excellent. From what I understand noise reduction/suppression is crucial for digital to analog sound reproduction.