Border Patrol USB DAC

[analogue]

Anyone have some experience with this DAC?

 

I think this one is pretty old school :

TDA1543, NOS, no output buffering, tube power supply, etc.

Seems to be getting attention on CNET (Steve Guttenberg)...
A kinder, gentler sound for digital audio - CNET

...AudioStream ...
BorderPatrol USB DAC | AudioStream

and (just yesterday) on Guttenberg's YouTube vlog:
YouTube

The "SE" version is pretty $$ (at $1300). 
The company has the specs and claims on their web site incl:

Quote:

To our knowledge, BorderPatrol is the only  company applying tube rectification and  choke input filtering to digital circuits.

[Panelhead]

  And a 50 cent dac chip. 

[opus101]

I feel that price is a bit optimistic - more like under $0.25 on Taobao https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?spm=a230r.1.14.29.74e25c8a03Vtfi&id=561883680776&ns=1&abbucket=3#detail

[analogue]

The price per DAC (chip) is not that relevant to this discussion. Many DAC chips are avail. for cheap on eBay or Taobao.

[analogue]

Yuuuugely disappointed in you folks for not knowing about this one.

Then again, your country voted in you know who as C-I-C.

Y'all 'ave a good 'un

[Norton]

I can't help you with experience of this DAC, but I noticed it a few months back and thought it looked interesting.

[Thelonious Monk]

I own various DACs, including a Yggdrasil (with USB 5, but not Analog 2 yet -- I'm currently in the queue for that), Auralic Vega, and an Oppo 205. Intrigued by the reviews, a couple months ago I decided to purchase a Border Patrol DAC, figuring I could always return it (within 15 days) if I wasn't happy. I had a conversation with the designer/manufacturer, Gary Dews, prior to purchasing, and he suggested that I play music through it continually for a few days as it would sound a bit "forward" out of the box, but would relax and become more musical within a day or two.

 

He was correct. The first day I wasn't sure if I would keep it, but by the second day I knew this was the most musical DAC I'd ever heard. I've been a foaming at the mouth audio freak for over 40 years, and will state without hesitation that I have never enjoyed recorded music as much as I do now. CDs sound amazing, as does high-res up to 24/96. Anything higher than that and you get silence.

 

I had a few dozen recordings at 24/192, so I batched them up in FooBar and down-sampled them all to 24/96. No regrets there... everything I play through the BP sounds wonderful... and very "analog".

 

I purchased the "SE" (tube) version with both USB and co-ax inputs, and replaced the stock tube with a NOS Mullard EZ80. Note: I have not heard any mega expensive DACs for comparison purposes... I only know that I am super happy with the BP DAC. A/B-ing against my other DACs, the BP is more lifelike, detailed and musical. Sorry to fall back on a stock phrase like that, but I can't think of a more accurate description.

 

P.S. It will be interesting to hear how the Yggdrasil compares when it comes back from the factory with the Analog 2 upgrade.

[Panelhead]

7 hours ago, Thelonious Monk said:

I own various DACs, including a Yggdrasil (with USB 5, but not Analog 2 yet -- I'm currently in the queue for that), Auralic Vega, and an Oppo 205. Intrigued by the reviews, a couple months ago I decided to purchase a Border Patrol DAC, figuring I could always return it (within 15 days) if I wasn't happy. I had a conversation with the designer/manufacturer, Gary Dews, prior to purchasing, and he suggested that I play music through it continually for a few days as it would sound a bit "forward" out of the box, but would relax and become more musical within a day or two.

 

He was correct. The first day I wasn't sure if I would keep it, but by the second day I knew this was the most musical DAC I'd ever heard. I've been a foaming at the mouth audio freak for over 40 years, and will state without hesitation that I have never enjoyed recorded music as much as I do now. CDs sound amazing, as does high-res up to 24/96. Anything higher than that and you get silence.

 

I had a few dozen recordings at 24/192, so I batched them up in FooBar and down-sampled them all to 24/96. No regrets there... everything I play through the BP sounds wonderful... and very "analog".

 

I purchased the "SE" (tube) version with both USB and co-ax inputs, and replaced the stock tube with a NOS Mullard EZ80. Note: I have not heard any mega expensive DACs for comparison purposes... I only know that I am super happy with the BP DAC. A/B-ing against my other DACs, the BP is more lifelike, detailed and musical. Sorry to fall back on a stock phrase like that, but I can't think of a more accurate description.

 

P.S. It will be interesting to hear how the Yggdrasil compares when it comes back from the factory with the Analog 2 upgrade.

 That is very high praise. Others have gotten good sonics from that dac chip. 

[zackthedog]

I've heard it and it's very nice, with a spacious analogue sound, without being the least bit "mushy" or artifically "warm".  Loads of inner texture and clarity.  A friend of mine sent it to me to audition.  He bought the SE version with the tube rectifier option.  I frankly prefered it without the rectifier engaged, a bit crisper and more refined on top.  He uses it with an old Jolida CD player and absolutely loves it, says everything he plays sounds wonderful.  For the money, if you're good with settling for 44.1 (or 96 upsampled) it's quite a bargain, IMO.

[simonhiggs]

On 2/25/2018 at 3:28 PM, zackthedog said:

I frankly prefered it without the rectifier engaged, a bit crisper and more refined on top.

I have this DAC for a couple of months now, and didn't know it was possible to use it with the valve off! I prefer it when listening at low level. Thanks!

[rando]

In a rare move I visited an outside review site to see what they thought of the Border Patrol USB DAC.  Where something that looks a lot like a direct reference to this outlaw enterprise  august forum made the closing remarks.  No spite, I find this recent spate of outrage quite reassuring.

 

Quote

Also note (especially for those Computer Audiophile guys that like to plug their DACs directly into an amp because of a predilection for epically sub-par preamplifiers) that there is no volume control knob or switch on this particular DAC, so plugging it directly into an amp may/will require using Roon or some other app, tool, or gadget that does allow you to attenuate.

 

 

[Elon]

Bumping to see if anyone else has experience with this DAC. 

 

I notice that it now supports 96/24. This is great news!  The Part Time review from last year was very intriguing to me, but 44.1 only was hard to take. But, with 96, I would be fine down Rez'ing my few 128k albums.  It is just the conversation to from a base 48 to a base 44.1 that I couldn't handle. Does anyone know the story here? Did they shift to a different R2R chip, or was that review just always wrong? The ability to run it with both tube and solid state power seems awesome as well, and at just over $1k, it's a great price.

 

Do people here just ignore it because you can't run 768 HQPlayer streams through it?

[zackthedog]

2 hours ago, Elon said:

Bumping to see if anyone else has experience with this DAC. 

 

I notice that it now supports 96/24. This is great news!  The Part Time review from last year was very intriguing to me, but 44.1 only was hard to take. But, with 96, I would be fine down Rez'ing my few 128k albums.  It is just the conversation to from a base 48 to a base 44.1 that I couldn't handle. Does anyone know the story here? Did they shift to a different R2R chip, or was that review just always wrong? The ability to run it with both tube and solid state power seems awesome as well, and at just over $1k, it's a great price.

 

Do people here just ignore it because you can't run 768 HQPlayer streams through it?

 

Presumably, yes. :-)  It's a bit "retro."  My understanding is that the 96kH is achieved through "upsampling," but I'm not entirely clear on that.

[MrUnderhill]

I have owned the BP SE DAC for the best part of a year - it is superb.

 

I believe the BP DAC achieves 96/24 by truncation - it simply throws away any data over 16/44.1.

 

Following a bake off in my house a few months ago I reported on another site and is included below.

 

In the report I state I preferred the Matrix SPDIF 2 over the SingXer F1, in fact i have changed my mind, although I did buy the Matrix and do occasional swaps.

 

Since writing the report I have: upgraded my server from the Raspberry Pi 3 to the Vortexbox Prestige 2; Introduced the PoE DC via CAT 7 tweak; Honed the widgets and power in my system. The BP has been completely transparent in allowing me to hear the differences, both good and bad.

 

Although on the day I would have picked the Audionote 2.1 over the BP SE, AND the Audionote 4.1, I am looking forward to re-traeding this bake off at the end of the month. Either way, the BP is staying and is a complete BARGAIN in my opinion.

 

Bake Off Report

 

Introduction

Would love to have opened this up, but I only have a small living room.

Visited by Metatron and George47 yesterday, together with George's AudioNote (AN) 2.1, an AN4.1 he is currently sheltering and the Matrix SPDIF 2 that he recently reviewed.

I bought a Schiit Eitr and so we had a three way comparison between my current DDC, the SingXer F1, the Matrix and the Eitr.

The main aim was to repeat the get together a couple of weeks ago where we compared the AN2.1 and Border Patrol (BP) DACs in Metatron's system, but in mine.

My system (briefly):

USB Storage/StarTech/Raspberry Pi 3 powered by R-Core Chinese LPSU via LT3045
Sonore ultraRendu powered by R-Core Chinese LPSU via LT3045 x 2
DDC
DAC
EAR868/EAR534
Focal 1008be II

 

One thing I have been wrestling with for months is edge. I think there are a number of reasons for this and present in different, although similar, ways. I have made progress but this was again bothering me, especially as I thought I had more or less put it to bed a few weeks ago - this was a driving force behind trying the different DDCs. They made NO DIFFERENCE on the edge front, but something else did, which I will return to later.

We made up a review music list, which was modified over the day: See Appendix A.

 

The DDCs

Metatron was delayed so George and I initially compared the DDCs. My view:

F1
https://www.shenzhenaudio.com/singxer-f-1-xmos-usb-digital-interface-board-xu208-chip-high-end-u8-upgraded-version.html
Detailed.

Eitr
http://www.schiit.com/products/eitr
Detailed. Bit more weight to the intruments. Bass perhaps a touch better defined.

Matrix
http://www.matrix-digi.com/en/products/158/index.html
Wow. Detailed. Weighty presentation. Warmer. Excellent sound stage. More below.

The DAC comparisons were therefore done with the Matrix.

 

The DACs
The DAC comparison was obviously very straightforward: 4.1 > 2.1 > BP. Actually ......no.

I bought the Border Patrol having done long comparisons with the Bel Canto DAC 3.5vb, Schiit Yggdrasil and the Lampizator L4G5. All are good DACs but their presentations will suit different tastes and systems. For me the BP wasn't as detailed as the Yggy, or as euphonic as the Lampizator, but it communicated music in a joy filled and enthusiastic fashion that I find extends any music listening session.

Listening to the AN2.1 at Metatron's was very similar to the BP, but added: a bit more bass weight; detail; and spacial positioning. It repeated this in my system.

The AN4.1 is a bigger and MUCH heavier beast. I believe this IS probably the best of the DACs .....but NOT in my system; system synergy. The 4.1 extracted more detail and nuance but just lacked the boogie factor of the 2.1 and BP.

Intellectually I believe the order of the DACs in terms of detail and presentation is 4.1 > 2.1 > BP; in the right system.
However, in my system the order for me was: 2.1 > (4.1 = BP), where the detail and nuance of the 4.1 was equaled by the BP's boogie.

We ended the day playing Streetwalker and Billie Jean via the 2.1, what a blast.

Edge
While trying the 4.1 we used the SE inputs, but decided to try the balanced, this failed for some reason (I suspect my cables). I realised that I had plugged the balanced cables into my Oppo 105D a few weeks ago. Removing these cables appeared to reduce the edge we were hearing. I will be testing this again today.

Matrix
I am very impressed by this small box of tricks. It is not simply that I am hearing added detail from very familier tracks it warmth and instrumental weight makes me listen to whole albums where before I might have been inclined to listen to certain tracks.

Conclusion
I suspect I will be buying the Matrix.
I am very happy with the BP DAC, which I think is an absolute bargain. However, if an AN2.1 comes up at the right price I suspect I will find it very hard to resist.

Thanks to George & Metatron.

Appendix A - Music Playlist
---------------------------------------------

......

[mansr]

1 hour ago, MrUnderhill said:

I believe the BP DAC achieves 96/24 by truncation - it simply throws away any data over 16/44.1.

The TDA1543 chip supports sample rates up to 192 kHz. It was originally used in Philips CD players together with a separate 4x upsampling chip. The resolution is limited to 16 bits.

[tmtomh]

The TDA1543 is considered the best example of the Philips TDA154x series of NOS DACs used in the earliest generations of many CD players (including the many brands that were just re-badged Philips units early on).

 

It's a R2R DAC and has a cult following for its "analogue" sound. Pairing it with a vacuum tube stage, therefore, seems a bit hinky to me - although I do appreciate that the tube is recessed rather than sticking out of the unit like bling.

 

[mansr]

10 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

The TDA1543 is considered the best example of the Philips TDA154x series of NOS DACs used in the earliest generations of many CD players (including the many brands that were just re-badged Philips units early on).

Every single one of those CD players used a 4x upsampling chip. The TDA1543 is the low-cost version, and it shows in the specs. The cult following it has these days is somewhat bizarre.

[tmtomh]

12 minutes ago, mansr said:

Every single one of those CD players used a 4x upsampling chip. The TDA1543 is the low-cost version, and it shows in the specs. The cult following it has these days is somewhat bizarre.

 

Ah, maybe I was confused: Is it the 1540 or 41 that is considered the best one then? As for NOS vs oversampling, I though the 4x oversampling came in slightly later and the initial models were NOS. No?

[mansr]

17 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

Ah, maybe I was confused: Is it the 1540 or 41 that is considered the best one then? As for NOS vs oversampling, I though the 4x oversampling came in slightly later and the initial models were NOS. No?

The TDA1540 was the 14-bit DAC used in the original CD100 and a few other early models. It was soon replaced by the 16-bit TDA1541. All of them used 4x upsampling. The first Sony CD players were NOS.

[opus101]

2 hours ago, tmtomh said:

It's a R2R DAC and has a cult following for its "analogue" sound. Pairing it with a vacuum tube stage, therefore, seems a bit hinky to me - although I do appreciate that the tube is recessed rather than sticking out of the unit like bling.

 

No Philips designed DACs are R2R - that designation refers to a series of resistors controlled by switches. Philips used transistors as current sources though which gets around the glitchiness of the R2R approach. Rather than relying on matching of resistors Philips adopts an active DEM (dynamic element matching) approach, at least for part of the DAC array in the 1541, though not in the 1543 as that's the economy device.

[MrUnderhill]

9 hours ago, mansr said:

The TDA1543 chip supports sample rates up to 192 kHz. It was originally used in Philips CD players together with a separate 4x upsampling chip. The resolution is limited to 16 bits.

 

The specification may allow 192, I believe from my conversations with Gary Dews that this is not how this DAC has been instantiated.

8 hours ago, mansr said:

 The TDA1543 is the low-cost version, and it shows in the specs.

I believe this is correct.

 

The bottom line for me is that the chip is one piece of a much larger jigsaw puzzle.

 

In my case I was using a £4k+ DAC that was detailed and on a par with my previous Naim DAC + XPS. The BP simply works in my system and has me listening to music for hours at a stretch.

 

8 hours ago, tmtomh said:

It's a R2R DAC and has a cult following for its "analogue" sound. Pairing it with a vacuum tube stage, therefore, seems a bit hinky to me - although I do appreciate that the tube is recessed rather than sticking out of the unit like bling.

 

 

The BP valve is no part of the signal processing, it is used as a part of the power supply.

 

R2R vs DS is a complex area, and again an 'analogue' sound, and we would need to agree what we mean by that, is more than just the chip that is used. In the context of the four DACs I immediately compared before buying the BP the Lampizator was the most euphonic, and that was DS.

 

IF by analogue we mean that absence of a certain glare and edge, or more particularly a feeling of relaxation when we are listening to music, then while the DAC is a part of the system I feel that power handling in the digital chain is more important; a different topic for another thread.

 

M

[analogue]

The BP made it to print. I.e., in latest Stereophile print mag. And on their web site, too.

BP must've found a stash of TDA1543s. Not surprised ... eBay and Taobao have sold zillions of classic Philips DAC chips for years. I think some  Philips DACs were extracted from SoundBlaser soundcards from the late 90s ... and you know how many of them were sold!

 

About that "analog" sound ... well, a LOT of that is attributed to the lack of digital filtering (oversampling) on units like BP. The new Stereophile review compares the BP to the latest Benchmark. The former "wins" for "romantic" sound.

[emcdade]

I tried out the BP SE Dac and returned it.  Did not like it, in fact I thought it sounded worse than my Fostex HP-A8 for about one third the price.  Weak bass, average at best imaging, rolled off and kind of grainy highs that lacked air.  It has a pretty good tone to it, but that was the only saving grace for me.  Not surprised it measured terribly in S’phile.

 

I now have a T+A Dac 8 DSD, and am really enjoying it.  Now there is a true bargain at 4 grand if you can feed it DSD, or even without.  

[TiborM]

On 8/26/2018 at 10:42 PM, emcdade said:

I tried out the BP SE Dac and returned it.  Did not like it, in fact I thought it sounded worse than my Fostex HP-A8 for about one third the price.  Weak bass, average at best imaging, rolled off and kind of grainy highs that lacked air.  It has a pretty good tone to it, but that was the only saving grace for me.  Not surprised it measured terribly in S’phile.

 

I now have a T+A Dac 8 DSD, and am really enjoying it.  Now there is a true bargain at 4 grand if you can feed it DSD, or even without.  

Hey and did you burn in the dac for at least 150 or even 200 hours? 

I have an Audio Gd r2r 1 dac and had the same findings as you at the beginning, but then the magic started, haven't heard anything better since, very musical. 

[Kendrick]

My new Border Patrol SE Dac has only three days (72 hours) of burn-in but sounds absolutely fabulous.  The BP is more revealing and clearer sounding than my current ($2,500) Dac but is not in any way bright or detailed.  On the contrary, the presentation of voices and instruments is surprisingly natural.  It's early still, so maybe the sound quality will get even better with time!