Jump to content
IGNORED

ECdesigns


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, bodiebill said:

it was still the unbeaten benchmark until it died on me a week ago 😑

🙁

Topaz 2.5Kva Isolation Transformer > EtherRegen switch powered by Paul Hynes SR4 LPS >MacBook Pro 2013 > EC Designs PowerDac SX > TNT UBYTE-2 Speaker cables > Omega Super Alnico Monitors > 2x Rel T Zero Subwoofers. 

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

I could see how we're turning PowerDAC-R into a super-simple headphone setup easily, and we could even bring everything with us while we're on the road.

 

These guys cost about 50 bucks per meter, and we only need a single digital cable to get the job done instead of carrying an extra box

 

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=615857871346

ylApkXR.jpg

 

Just a little bit over $80 per meter for this one

 

https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=631166131327

Nw1gUdi.jpg

They've got everything covered with USB-A / USB-C / micro USB / Lightning so that all new and old laptops / tablets / smartphones etc. are working just fine. Apple Music just went lossless recently and therefore we're able to keep about 75 million songs in the pocket, wherever we've got Internet access.

 


 

Now that the source is taken care of, let's think about power then. Apparently there's a "secret" about those USB-C GaN chargers and here we go

 

https://streamable.com/9ezeba

https://www.facebook.com/ho.keung.18/videos/249065390005674

 

IsoTek Blue Horizon was showing 710254129091 and we could understand why GaN is so beneficial, not to mention the fact that most of them are really affordable.

 

Just an FYI as follows

 

Transphorm Increases Noise Immunity and Reduces Switching Noise with Third Generation GaN Power Conversion Platform

https://www.transphormusa.com/en/news/transphorm-increases-noise-immunity-reduces-switching-noise-third-generation-gan-power-conversion-platform/

 

So that's precisely the reason why Taiko Audio would also go for GaN themselves

 

https://taikoaudio.com/taiko-2020/product/taiko-audio-dc-dc-atx/

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/58164-building-a-diy-music-server/page/91/?tab=comments#comment-1125719

 

BTW, there's a gentleman who compared boat load of USB-C GaN chargers on his own and finally one of them actually came out on top

 

https://shopping.yahoo.co.jp/user_review/?yd=ran0Wpg1dvLyxuk-

https://www.my-hiend.com/vbb/showthread.php?13157-piCorePlayer6-1-0-Xenomai-44-1-48KHz雙機入門簡易安裝教學&p=244358#post244358

 

Elecom ACDC-PD1165BK costs about $36 (minus 10% sales tax / plus international shipping) a piece

 

https://www.amazon.co.jp/-/en/Nitride-ACDC-PD1165BK-Smartphone-Nintendo-Certified/dp/B08QV4ZYQZ

 

We'll also need one of those USB-C PD trigger cables or modules, make absolutely sure that the output voltage is 5V at all times or else we'll end up frying PowerDAC-R for real. Get something with a voltage display like this and it should prevent us from making a mistake

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001125257633.html

 

It's such a dream comes true, Elecom ACDC-PD1165BK weighs only 137g plus another 1.44kg for PowerDAC-R. Usually a smartphone should be under 200g while we simply need nothing more than a single digital cable. Finally add the weight of PD trigger cable / module and we're talking about 2kg or less.

 

Put PowerDAC-R inside Pelican V300 and it's a done deal

 

https://www.buycasesforless.com/p-25148-pelican-v300-vault-case.aspx

 

What a nice little package that could keep us very happy with the right pair of headphones, no matter where we go.

 

Many thanks to John and Gordon who are working so hard to bring us a tremendous amount of joy.

Link to comment

Speaking of headphone use, I received today an Etymotic ER4SR. I had used the original Etymotic ER4 years ago and had really enjoyed them. I was curious to try this new model and compare them to my other headphones (Beyerdynamic DT990, and a recently acquired pair of Dan Clark Aeon2 that left me a little underwhelmed and will be returned). They are indeed very neutral and transparent, and work incredibly well with the PowerDAC.

 

I played a number of well recorded tracks which I have listened to on many systems I can honestly say I have never heard those tracks as I should have. The distortion you get from amplifiers and speakers is unfortunately something real, however pleasant the end result may be.

 

Here's a good test track (which I have heard many times, including on systems I could never afford):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxRnd_ACxJo

 

Setup for the occasion: Foobar on my noisy desktop PC -> UT96 USB to Optical -> PowerDAC -> Etymotic with ECD's adapter cable (RCA to mini-jack).

 

I also listened to them with the headphone out of the Mosaic UV, with the UV also connected directly on its USB input to my noisy PC. In fact, I started out by listening to the Etymotic using the UV. While the sound is very good, and I could definitely live with it (and have in the past!), there is an obvious jump in quality when using the PowerDAC.

 

I am not a huge fan of heaphones and generally prefer listening to my (modest) speakers. A lot of what I listen to is not particularly well recorded, so on those tracks the added transparency of headphones is not as important for me, but I cannot listen to my speakers all the time. However, the PowerDAC with these headphones is a great tool to understand the compromises of a larger system, and are also interesting for me when evaluating the quality of various releases on streaming services (ex: Qobuz).

Link to comment

My first post here.
 

Just received my Power DAC R yesterday. My setup is very modest. A Matsushita 8PW1 Single driver full range open baffle driven by SE 6L6 in a modest size room. A windows laptop optimized for audio playing, streaming  from lossless collection or Spotify, Apple Music, and UT96 as the interface between the laptop and Power DAC. 
 

As recommended, I tried using the long 10 feet Toslink cable I bought but had to revert to short cable supplied by ECdesigns as it did not work. My first query as the difference between UT96 (Toslink input) and U192  ( Electrotos Input) to Power DAC seems to have been already answered in above posts. 
 

However my second query is, since I have played Fractal too in the same setup, is it just me that Fractal presented way darker / quite background than the Power DAC ? Could it be attributed to Electrotos input to Fractal ?

 

However Power DAC R is surely an upgrade over Fractal, sonically. 

Link to comment

@seeteeyou Thanks for pointing out GaN power supplies. I ordered one to test (as a phone charger) and using a crude method to evaluated RF (an AM radio receiver) it does seem to emit much less than cheap SMPS. Though it is more costly, it is also more efficient. I will probably order a few more to replace all the SMPS I currently have in my house.

 

Concerning its use as a PS for the PowerDAC, I would be very cautious (voltage detection). The PowerDAC's power supply is not very large, very light, so it may not be worth taking any chances, for little benefits.

 

I'll open up a seperate topic on these GaN power supplies, as it is interesting to follow.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, guls said:

For people who used Power DAC as well as DA96ETF, when used just as a pure DAC, how much of an upgrade is Power DAC over DA96ETF? Is it marginal or significant?


I guess it’s significant given its features as it weeds out need of a preamp too. However I don’t see the same dark exemplary background which was on the DA96 despite adding filtering to the mains power supply. My setup with Power DAC remains the same as it was with DA96.

 

Further I don’t know how much difference the absence of USB - Electrotos interface makes to Power DAC.

 

My third observation with Power DAC / UT96 combo: A longer 10 feet Toslink cable actually degraded the sound so I had to put the stock cable back. Today will try another longer cable and report my impressions. 
 

My setup is very simple and transparent to each component in the line up. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, yogibear said:


I guess it’s significant given its features as it weeds out need of a preamp too. However I don’t see the same dark exemplary background which was on the DA96 despite adding filtering to the mains power supply. My setup with Power DAC remains the same as it was with DA96.

 

Further I don’t know how much difference the absence of USB - Electrotos interface makes to Power DAC.

 

My third observation with Power DAC / UT96 combo: A longer 10 feet Toslink cable actually degraded the sound so I had to put the stock cable back. Today will try another longer cable and report my impressions. 
 

My setup is very simple and transparent to each component in the line up. 

 

Interesting! I thought I heard an improvement over the DA96 when I first connected the PD. However, at one point I started to be bored by the PD and I  have now switched back ro my Musician Pegasus which sounds much more lively and open.

 

Now you have given me an idea (thanks for that!):

Could this change have coincided with my use of a 15m TosLink cable?

I will switch back to shorter cable length when I find the time and opportunity. 

 

If this is indeed the cause, this would be interesting for our 'source immunity' discussion as it would indicate that the Pegasus is more source immune than the PD in this respect. But I will not draw rash conclusions until I have tried and will report back...

 

audio system

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, yogibear said:

I guess it’s significant given its features as it weeds out need of a preamp too. However I don’t see the same dark exemplary background which was on the DA96


 

Interesting to read your views (and perhaps between the lines...)

 

For me, both with the DA96ETF and the MOS16, it’s always been about the specific combination of the DAC and matching UPL.  I recently put the previous generation  ECD kit back in my system after some absence and was reminded that with U192 the DA96ETF was OK but nothing special, but with the UPL the old wow factor was back.  
 

I struggle with the notion of source immunity with the PowerDAC because to me that also implies absolute source equivalence - for example,  I’m sceptical  that clever DAC design is ever  going to make Qobuz PC desktop sound identical to replay from a dedicated and directly attached local transport /storage ( unless of course  the latter is being somehow levelled down in order to do so).

 

Have you been able to compare the PowerDAC with UPL vs UT96, or indeed PowerDAC/UPL with DA96ETF/UPL?

Link to comment
3 hours ago, yogibear said:

..My setup with Power DAC remains the same as it was with DA96.

2 hours ago, bodiebill said:

...However, at one point I started to be bored by the PD and I  have now switched back ro my Musician Pegasus which sounds much more lively and open...

 

Interesting... Has opinion changed on the Power DAC from the initial rave reviews?

Topaz 2.5Kva Isolation Transformer > EtherRegen switch powered by Paul Hynes SR4 LPS >MacBook Pro 2013 > EC Designs PowerDac SX > TNT UBYTE-2 Speaker cables > Omega Super Alnico Monitors > 2x Rel T Zero Subwoofers. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Norton said:

Interesting to read your views (and perhaps between the lines...)

 

For me, both with the DA96ETF and the MOS16, it’s always been about the specific combination of the DAC and matching UPL.  I recently put the previous generation  ECD kit back in my system after some absence and was reminded that with U192 the DA96ETF was OK but nothing special, but with the UPL the old wow factor was back.  
 

I struggle with the notion of source immunity with the PowerDAC because to me that also implies absolute source equivalence - for example,  I’m sceptical  that clever DAC design is ever  going to make Qobuz PC desktop sound identical to replay from a dedicated and directly attached local transport /storage ( unless of course  the latter is being somehow levelled down in order to do so).

 

Have you been able to compare the PowerDAC with UPL vs UT96, or indeed PowerDAC/UPL with DA96ETF/UPL?

 

Maybe we should forget about source immunity -- that holy grail.

Your experience with the 'wow' delta between the UPL and U192 is another example, and similar to what I experienced. That is why -- after the decease of my SD transport -- I again ordered a stand alone player (Aune X5S 8th + external 10 MHz clock). Because unto this day, in my setup, the network has had a detrimental effect on SQ.

 

But even without source immunity, ECdesigns has succeeded to considerably decrease source dependence, which is quite an achievement!

 

audio system

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Norton said:

I struggle with the notion of source immunity with the PowerDAC because to me that also implies absolute source equivalence - for example,  I’m sceptical  that clever DAC design is ever  going to make Qobuz PC desktop sound identical to replay from a dedicated and directly attached local transport /storage ( unless of course  the latter is being somehow levelled down in order to do so).

 

Don't want to hijack, yet again, the conversation, but I cannot resist asking why "source equivalence" would be a bad thing? 

 

I really resisted giving up the UPL at first (and for me that meant investing time to adapt my own application to make it work with another player). But I really could find no reason to keep on using it. The silver lining was also being able to enjoy streaming from Qobuz, which I was never doing before. I now have the benefit of choosing the most convenient solution, not the "audiophile" one.

 

 

Link to comment
Just now, tapatrick said:

Interesting... Has opinion changed on the Power DAC from the initial rave reviews?

 

Please note: it could all be me and my crazy setup with the long TosLink cable. Also recently I changed to different speakers and power amp. First (sometime next week) I will try to let the PD shine again with a stand alone player (without network) and a shorter cable...

 

audio system

 

Link to comment

Concerning cable length, 10 meter Toslink is pushing it - perhaps the quality of the TosLink does come into play at that point? I've used 2 meter Toslink without a problem, and a 10 meter coax cable extension with the U192, without any differences, but did not try 10 m Toslink. 

 

The idea behind using a long cable (at least for me) was to remove as many devices as possible from close proximity to my system, especially since  my speaker cables are not shielded. Your mileage may vary... 

 

I bought (for a few euros) the 10 meter coax extension specifically to test whether cable length had any impact. 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, hopkins said:

Concerning cable length, 10 meter Toslink is pushing it. I've used 2 meter Toslink without a problem, and a 10 meter coax cable extension with the U192, without any differences, but did not try 10 m Toslink. 

 

The 15m one sounds damn good now with the Pegasus and without any hiccups. But we will see...

 

audio system

 

Link to comment
Just now, bodiebill said:

Actually I am sorry I posted my intermediate findings :-|

Maybe I should have finished the experiment with cable lengths and only then reported the result (if worthwhile).

 

Don't be! I don't think anyone here is 100% confident about their own judgment. 🙂 I am not going to try other DACs to compare, mostly because I am happy with the sound I get, and à little exhausted by testing, but it is interesting to read other's opinions. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, hopkins said:

but I cannot resist asking why "source equivalence" would be a bad thing? 


I wasn’t suggesting that “source equivalence” would a bad thing, but rather that IMO it doesn’t exist, so that  any DAC that is truly “source immune“ would have to  somehow level down to the lowest quality source, which would be a bad thing.
 

In other words, I’m sceptical that, at the DAC stage of the replay chain, action can be taken to render all sources truly equivalent to the highest quality source (the latter  identified by  listening via a DAC for which no claims of source immunity are made).  It could be argued that sensitivity  to source quality is a hall mark of a higher quality, more transparent DAC.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Norton said:

I wasn’t suggesting that “source equivalence” would a bad thing, but rather that IMO it doesn’t exist, so that  any DAC that is truly “source immune“ would have to  somehow level down to the lowest quality source, which would be a bad thing.
 

In other words, I’m sceptical that, at the DAC stage of the replay chain, action can be taken to render all sources truly equivalent to the highest quality source (the latter  identified by  listening via a DAC for which no claims of source immunity are made).

 

Agreed. An unplugged DAC is source immune, but that is not what we are after.

 

audio system

 

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, Norton said:


I wasn’t suggesting that “source equivalence” would a bad thing, but rather that IMO it doesn’t exist, so that  any DAC that is truly “source immune“ would have to  somehow level down to the lowest quality source, which would be a bad thing.

 

Thanks for clarifying. Here's my "simple" understanding. There are 3 things that are to be considered:

 

- the accuracy of the data, which is what we refer to as "bit-perfectness"

- the noise from the source 

- jitter (the fact that ultimately the frequency samples going into the DAC do so with perfect or close to perfect timing)

 

I think we can agree that bit-perfectness can be achieved with a number of sources, we don't need "high-end audiophile" sources for that. That's the beauty of digital (as opposed to vinyl, for example, where it is so difficult to accurately read the "data" engraved in the LP, as you well know).

 

Noise from the source is dealt with by using a Toslink connection, which is non-electrical, just light pulses from a LED.  With other "interlinks" (USB, I2S, AES, coaxial) you have electrical connections between the source and the DAC. In addition, the "bandwidth" used by the Toslink signal is lower than with any of these other connections, so the signal going through does not "include" high frequency noise, which ECD explains is the main issue (as it spreads more easily). Toslink bandwidth = 25Mhz, versus several Ghz for all others.

 

Jitter handling is just being "transposed" from being "minimized" at the source to being "minimized" within the DAC.

 

So audiophile sources that promise to minimize noise and minimize jitter are no longer relevant :)

 

 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Norton said:


 

Interesting to read your views (and perhaps between the lines...)

 

For me, both with the DA96ETF and the MOS16, it’s always been about the specific combination of the DAC and matching UPL.  I recently put the previous generation  ECD kit back in my system after some absence and was reminded that with U192 the DA96ETF was OK but nothing special, but with the UPL the old wow factor was back.  
 

I struggle with the notion of source immunity with the PowerDAC because to me that also implies absolute source equivalence - for example,  I’m sceptical  that clever DAC design is ever  going to make Qobuz PC desktop sound identical to replay from a dedicated and directly attached local transport /storage ( unless of course  the latter is being somehow levelled down in order to do so).

 

Have you been able to compare the PowerDAC with UPL vs UT96, or indeed PowerDAC/UPL with DA96ETF/UPL?

 

One clarification: I do not use preamp in my line up. The DHT Tube preamp is sitting duck and another nice SS, already sold.

 

Changed the stock Toslink to a 2 meter / 6 feet cable. No degradation in sonics this time. So this is settled.

 

I like to keep simple and short line up. Mine is an audio optimized windows laptop connected to Power DAC, which feeds my DIY tube amp mono blocks driving single full range drivers on large L shape open baffles. 

 

Never used UPL so no experience here. First it was U192ETL with DA96ETF and now its Power DAC R with UT96. However I would love to someday couple PD with U192ETL.

 

The U192ETL / DA96ETF is now with a friend who has a respectable TT and Vinyl collection. His observation is consistent with mine on the combo. Very very dark..... He loves the DAC so much that he takes very long time gaps to go back to his Vinyl setup. He has had many popular branded DACs in his stable. (Under $10K) He loves the DA96ETF and says all other DACs should "go back to school". (No arguments here, just sharing his views)

 

I have dedicated earth in my house, in fact two, each 15 feet deep, running a solid thick copper strip running all to the power distribution box.

 

I have had many DACs, nothing too special, first being Objective DAC and last two were DIY R2R based on monolith AD1862 and AD1856. The notion of rolling opamps made be uncomfortable. I sold them all to fund PD purchase. I have no regrets..... Only wish is to try Electrotos input over Toslink. 

 

One aspect I loved with DA96ETF / U192ETL with bundle purchase was, each cable was made by ECD. I wish the USB with PD was also made by ECD too... (Expecting Toslink to be made by them is unnecessary)  

 

In a recent blind test, RCA cables made by ECD were compared with 10X expensive branded RCA (well regarded) and there was no noticeable diffrence heard by any of the listeners, with DA96ETF / U192ETL combo. (Am no fan of "superb sounding cables",  just sharing one observation.)

 

 

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, hopkins said:

So audiophile sources that promise to minimize noise and minimize jitter are no longer relevant :)

 

So far the theory.

Now what does the fact mean that a (for me positive, for others perchance negative) difference is heard when adding a reclocker before the DAC?

And similar including vs excluding network for audio data?

 

audio system

 

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, bodiebill said:

 

So far the theory.

Now what does the fact mean that a (for me positive, for others perchance negative) difference is heard when adding a reclocker before the DAC?

And similar for incuding vs excluding network for audio data?

 

Agreed. That is the theory. What that means is that it is not working as expected ?

 

But what I meant to say is this: if you can accept the idea that an "audiophile" source can minimize noise & jitter, then it is not fundamentally different than accepting the idea that this could also be done within the DAC.  Do you see what I mean ? I was essentially replying to the concern that Norton expressed that source immunity would imply "leveling down" to the "worst" source.

 

So far, we have different experiences and that is not a problem - it makes for interesting conversations here :)

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...