FORGETTING the Digital to Analog conversion part, what is BEST Digital source?

[beerandmusic]

2 minutes ago, bibo01 said:

The measurements I am referring to are non-standard and are carried out with dynamic signal (like Music), not with standard static test signals.

Furthermore, various listening blind tests were carried out too.

 

So what is your take on current and future enet offerings?

[bibo01]

2 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

So what is your take on current and future enet offerings?

We'll get there soon. I know of a couple of developers who are working on Enet-to-I2S cards.

Personally, I welcome it.

[beerandmusic]

4 minutes ago, bibo01 said:

We'll get there soon. I know of a couple of developers who are working on Enet-to-I2S cards.

 

When you say card, do you mean something that would plug into a pc?

it will be nice to cut the chain in half in some way.

We don't need another device to plug into a dac...we need a music player that can plug into the amp...

[barrows]

3 minutes ago, bibo01 said:

We'll get there soon. I know of a couple of developers who are working on Enet-to-I2S cards.

Personally, I welcome it.

Me too.  But I hope they will do a better job than what is currently available.  My question is at what price, as beer's budget is very limited.  Then there is the integration into the DAC design: proper integration would require a completely separate power supply for the Ethernet receiver, including transformer, master XO(s) at the DAC sent back through isolation to the Ethernet receiver, and good shielding/physical separation from the Ethernet receiver.  While I agree that good DACs with Ethernet inout are what we will see, I just do not see it being possible at beer's price point, due to the integration requirements and engineering time needed.

[bibo01]

25 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

When you say card, do you mean something that would plug into a pc?

it will be nice to cut the chain in half in some way.

We don't need another device to plug into a dac...we need a music player that can plug into the amp...

They are OEM cards that can go inside a DAC or other ext. devices. 

[beerandmusic]

31 minutes ago, barrows said:

While I agree that good DACs with Ethernet inout are what we will see, I just do not see it being possible at beer's price point, due to the integration requirements and engineering time needed.

 

"good" is the subjective word there...i think we already have "good" inre many producsts (oppo205, lumin D1/D2, altair, PSAUDIO JR,ND8006, and the list goes on.....)

 

I am just suggesting same "good" products with same price point, but with newer wisdom in technology....that or an existing good dac that adds an enet port...like maybe marry the HOLO SPRING DSD with your enet port....if you can sell your ultra for $800, and the new DSD HOLO will be $1K, why couldn't we have a HOLO with an enet port for $2K?

 

I am not asking for the "best", as I doubt my ears could hear the differneces in a DBT...and believe much of it is either marketing hype or law of diminishing returns.

 

Once these designs are common place, competition will grow more fierce, and pricing will come down....that is a given.

 

 

[beerandmusic]

11 minutes ago, bibo01 said:

They are OEM cards that can go inside a DAC or other ext. devices. 

 

Ok...sounds great....license the card to HOLO SPRING so they can sport an enet port!

Get same developers to create a module to support ALEXA (wink)

[asdf1000]

22 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

Ok...sounds great....license the card to HOLO SPRING so they can sport an enet port!

Get same developers to create a module to support ALEXA (wink)

 

Ayre Acoustics and PS Audio (and another major DAC manufacturer whose name escapes me) use these ethernet to I2S cards...

 

http://www.conversdigital.com/kor/product/product01.php

 

As barrows pointed out earlier (and I agreed), just seeing an ethernet port on a DAC doesn't automatically make it the best sounding input. It may be the most convenient for sure, but you still need to listen to hear if it's the best sounding input, for that DAC.

 

There are many Ayre Acoustics and DirectStream DAC owners that think the USB input sounds better than their DAC's ethernet input... and many who think vice versa of course.

 

I think the ethernet physical interface will be improving quite a lot over the next year and two.

 

[barrows]

Yes, the Convers board is an option available now at a very low price, unfortunately performance of it is not SOTA.

[asdf1000]

15 minutes ago, barrows said:

Yes, the Convers board is an option available now at a very low price, unfortunately performance of it is not SOTA.

 

The board itself is one thing but it's implementation is another thing (as you pointed out in one of your earlier posts).

 

In the case of the DirectStream:

 

"The USB draws a constant amount of current + some current that depends on the sampling rate.

The Bridge is much more complicated in that there are many kinds of inputs possible with differing compute loads, think of it like a small PC.

On the other hand the DS’s power supply is really 4 separate regulators on two separate transformer windings, the bridge uses a separate regulator from the analog board…"

http://www.psaudio.com/forum/directstream-all-about-it/bridge-ii-power-consumption/#p78284

 

Best to listen and leave it to your ears to determine which is your favourite input.

 

 

[beerandmusic]

2 hours ago, Em2016 said:

 

 

 

As barrows pointed out earlier (and I agreed), just seeing an ethernet port on a DAC doesn't automatically make it the best sounding input.

 

well my experience is that native dsd over any ethernet product i have tried (at least a dozen), sounds better than pc out to usb....and that's even comparing native DSD to sony bluray player via DLNA vs same file sent out my pc usb to any usb dac (including the likes of a schiit multibit bifrost and a dozen others).  It may be my pc is noisy, but i thought my pc sounded fine out usb, but i just found doing native dsd over dlna sounded better.........and it didnt matter what ethernet medium i used.

 

[asdf1000]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

but i just found doing native dsd over dlna sounded better.........

 

Yup, you listened and compared both inputs and preferred one. That's the way to do it.

 

4 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

omparing native DSD to sony bluray player via DLNA vs same file sent out my pc usb to any usb dac (including the likes of a schiit multibit bifrost

 

I didn't think schiit DACs supported DSD?

 

[beerandmusic]

2 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

Yup, you listened and compared both inputs and preferred one. That's the way to do it.

 

 

I didn't think schiit DACs supported DSD?

 

they don't....which is one reason i say that native dsd over dlna will sound better...i can play the file, but it won't be native dsd...i have tried several other dacs that do support native dsd over usb as well, but to me native dsd over enet sounds best in all my testing.

 

[tapatrick]

On 1/7/2018 at 9:15 PM, gstew said:

 

I'm glad you found those posts, sorry for not responding faster.

 

The I2S over HDMI PS Audio format output should work VERY well with your Directstream DAC. As I remember, that was the then 'best' input method using a Sonore Signature Rendu as a source device when the original Directstream was reviewed on CA.

 

How many more orders are needed to get to 10? I might be tempted to get another... if only as a spare.

 

Looking forward to you experiences when you get one.

 

Greg in Mississippi

Thanks Greg, Yes the Ps audio I2S is my preferred input. Currently I've got a WavIO board with the Audio-gd HDMI playing through I2S into my DS Junior, sounding superb. (I have Lucians Bluewave board with new NDK clocks as well which is also superb but Spdif only)

 

Looks like I was the first to ask for a new batch of SDtrans384 from Jack at Tachyon. Lets see how long it will take. I was also looking at the Douk version. Do you have any knowledge of that one?

http://vi.vipr.ebaydesc.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemDescV4&item=252288891588&t=1511166003000&tid=10&category=48647&seller=doukmall&excSoj=1&excTrk=1&lsite=0&ittenable=false&domain=ebay.com&descgauge=1&cspheader=1&oneClk=1&secureDesc=0

[tapatrick]

On 1/7/2018 at 11:54 PM, gstew said:

@seeteeyou,

 

Thanks for the great SD card player references. I've been considering either a Pulsar or a DuCuLon clock for mine, these are good resources.

 

Have you seen any other comments on that alternative player? It looks more complex... I still think that is one of the things that makes the SDTran384 work so well, it is such a simple system compared to any other electronically-stored media player. But it is always good to check on alternatives. 

 

I also found the separate PSU links interesting. I will say that in my experience, it is VERY important to have the regulators as close as possible to the powered circuit... as a short-term measure, I am considering replacing the several 3.3V & one 1.2V ADP150 regulators on the SDTrans with LP5907s... a pin-compatible and good upgrade in every situation where I've done that. Later I will likely go for add-on LT3045 boards, mounted right on each regulator bypass point. Ultimately I will likely go to the float-charged LiFePO4's (as on TirNaHiFi) or Ultracaps (as by ABartels and BBallas on HeadFi).

 

Later!

 

Greg in Mississippi

Thanks both for the references.

I will be tempted to switch the regulators too when I get mine..

[tapatrick]

15 hours ago, monteverdi said:

My best digital source (as other mentioned) is SDtrans 384 using LiFePO batteries and an ultra low noise voltage regulator as PS. The main problem I have with it is user interface, especially knowing which music files are on which SD card.

I was recently auditioning a Innuos Zennith II and I thought that the sound quality is very very close (using USB vs SPDIF for the SDtrans).   Of course the UI (+/- Roon) is a completely different league so I ordered one.

One aspect I found interesting that Innuos uses a small, low power CPU somewhat restricting extensive DSP function, conversions to high DSD etc.. but they stated that it was done to optimize sound quality (the SDtrans is pretty extreme in minimized CPU).

Thanks for the info on comparing SdTrans with the Zennith II which seems to be the new go to server...

[marce]

13 hours ago, Em2016 said:

 

 

I think the ethernet physical interface will be improving quite a lot over the next year and two.

 

The Ethernet interface has been developing and improving for many years, it works is galanicly isolated at every connector with the magnetic's (common mode choke and pulse transformer) has an impressive data transfer rate with minimal problems these days (unlike the early days when it was a BNC connector with a T-junction at every node)... how do you mean improving?

[asdf1000]

4 hours ago, marce said:

how do you mean improving?

 

High sample rate support - there aren’t that many DACs with ethernet input that support DSD256 and PCM384kHz (or higher) via ethernet and do it well.

 

This will improve quickly. One example is the Zman board which has other features, in addition to DSD256. There would be others and custom solutions being worked on too.

 

[Albrecht]

19 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

"good" is the subjective word there...i think we already have "good" inre many producsts (oppo205, lumin D1/D2, altair, PSAUDIO JR,ND8006, and the list goes on.....)

 

I am just suggesting same "good" products with same price point, but with newer wisdom in technology....that or an existing good dac that adds an enet port...like maybe marry the HOLO SPRING DSD with your enet port....if you can sell your ultra for $800, and the new DSD HOLO will be $1K, why couldn't we have a HOLO with an enet port for $2K?

 

I am not asking for the "best", as I doubt my ears could hear the differneces in a DBT...and believe much of it is either marketing hype or law of diminishing returns.

 

Once these designs are common place, competition will grow more fierce, and pricing will come down....that is a given.

 

 

Hi, with respect that just doesn't hold true for high performance audio. Certain components cost what they cost, and prices go up... Is a capacitor that has 30% variance worse than one that has 7%?  Well yes and no, - there are likely several other elements in the product where the variance in that capacitor matters a lot or not. There's much more to a DAC than the actual DAC chip. A few designers have just learned a bit about USB isolation, re-clocking, and importance of really good linear power supplies in digital file players. Have some excellent devices been already made that contain some of these elements? yes, - absolutely.

 

I wouldn't be too loose with the phrases of marketing hype and law of diminishing returns. Both are moving targets and what is diminishing returns will vary from person to person and system to system. Certain devices are going to be better matches for different amplification speaker combos and there's only way to tell, - comparative listening. Marketing hype is only marketing hype if the product doesn't perform well across the board compared to other items that do the same thing. Yes, - the Meitner DACs are very expensive, - but they perform commensurately better than anything that will ever say Schiit or Sony on them in their appropriate context.

 

As high end audio manufacturers have come to understand that multi-function, multi-purpose, computer products are inadequate to produce the kind of performance in high performance audio, - they are being re-designed for single purpose, high-end sound reproduction which isn't going to bring costs down, - but actually make them go up, - because these parts are unique and not mass produced. Costs are high when you pour your own capacitors. Costs are high when you go through 500 tubes to get to 50 matching ones. 

The goal is great sound, which is somewhat at odds with great price. An SoTM SMS200 and Sonore ultraRendu sound substantially better than a mac-mini: and as improvements are being made with them, - their costs are going with improvements in sound.

[Ralf11]

22 hours ago, barrows said:

We did a private demo a couple of years ago (at RMAF) for some folks who wanted "proof" that USB out of the microRendu would be any better than USB out direct from a MacBook Pro.  We started with the MBP, then went to the microRendu...  It took less than 10 seconds of playback via the microRendu for everyone present to go "I get it now..."  The difference is not subtle.  BTW this was using a DAC with full galvanic isolation on its USB input, the difference with lesser USB inputs is even greater.

You might "believe" this is "highly debatable", but anyone who listens will not.  Keeping  noise out of the DAC is big advantage sonically and easily audible.

 

 

how do you think the noise got into the DAC?

[barrows]

17 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

how do you think the noise got into the DAC?

That would be the $10000 question, right!  Honestly, no isolation is perfect, so probably through some capacitive coupling.  The fact is I have never experienced a DAC, regardless of the quality of the USB receiver implementation, which is not sensitive to noise on the USB feed, some are more sensitive than others, but all sound better when fed from a better USB source.

Many DAC manufacturers claim to be immune to source quality, i have never experienced one that actually is.

[Ralf11]

I was wondering if EMF could be the issue -- esp. if the noisy radiator is near the DAC.

 

One thing is for sure - if galv. isolation still allows noise into a DAC, then some additional counter-measures are needed.  I've always wondered why optical isn't used more...

 

 

some have said the Benchmark is immune in the sense that it sounds just as good on any input (not measuring results)...

 

 

[barrows]

4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

I was wondering if EMF could be the issue -- esp. if the noisy radiator is near the DAC.

 

One thing is for sure - if galv. isolation still allows noise into a DAC, then some additional counter-measures are needed.  I've always wondered why optical isn't used more...

 

 

some have said the Benchmark is immune in the sense that it sounds just as good on any input (not measuring results)...

 

 

Hahaha!  That is a good one.  Hahahahaha!

[asdf1000]

23 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

I've always wondered why optical isn't used more...

 

Actually if you ask the designers of the DirectStream DAC and Chord Dave / Hugo etc, TOSlink is their favourite input for music content <192kHz and DSD64 (via DoP)

 

TOSlink is effectively immune to RFI, is perfectly isolated from the source and they say their DAC's (above) effectively eliminate jitter.

 

TOSlink obviously doesn't support >192kHz and DSD128 and over.

 

Fiber input (over the network) DACs would be cool. Playback Designs have had a fiber input for a long while.

[monteverdi]

The problem with Toslink is not the the optical part but the optical converters on both sides with are low grade parts (as far as I know much worse now than a couple of years ago). Optical isolation would be great if there would a decent industry standard (i.e. not specific to one manufacturer).