Topping D90 great but question future

[barrows]

In the Holo audio DACs there is a discrete converter for DSD, and a separate discrete converter for PCM, so regardless of what format you play, you are always not using one set of the discrete DACs.  Holo audio also sells two versions of their more simple DAC, the Cyan.  If you just want to play DSD, you can get the CYan DSD, and DSD is all it will do, so no worries about paying for circuitry you will not use.

 

As for the AKM chips, they have “direct DSD mode”, which bypasses all of the DSP, oversampling, and the delta sigma modulator, and just sends the incoming DSD stream directly to the conversion stage.  THis approach sounded fantastic to me with the D-90 and DSD 256.  Best performance with the AKM 4499 is with DSD 256 as far as I am concerned.

[barrows]

5 hours ago, ambre said:

Hi Barrows,

I own also a Topping 90 feeded by the Allo Usbridge Signature with Uptone IsoRegen.

Using always Hqplayer ( poly-sinc-ext2 and ASDM 7 or ASDM5EC)  for upsampling DSD 256 of 512 depending which filter I use.  

Can you explain why at DSD 256 is better? Is that in terms of (ASR)  measurement  and/or by listening?

 

Very best regards, Andreas

 

Hi Andreas.  I looked at the data sheet for the AKM 4499 chip used in  he D-90.  The data sheet has specifications for the chip's performance with different DSD rates, it can clearly be seen that at DSD 256 it performs very well, but that noise noise and distortion actually rise with DSD 512 input.  I have heard Andreas Koch (DSD expert and designer of Playback Designs DAC) discussing different DSD rates, and his point of view is that the "switches" used to convert DSD are not really fast enough to cope perfectly with sample rates as fast as DSD 512, so this may be why the AKM 4499 chip performs better with DSD 256 (the converter tech in the AKM 4499 is a switched resistor converter).

 

See section 8.1.2 of the attached data sheet for details. 

AK4499_Feb2019.pdf

[barrows]

2 hours ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Barrows,

 

Do you happen to know what's the spec of the fuse in the D90.  I think you've mentioned elsewhere that this DAC reponds well to upgrading with an audiophile grade fuse?

I am not sure I remember...  I think it was a 250 mA maybe?  Anyway, the fuse is marked.  Topping uses a dirt cheap glass body fuse, even a good quality Littlefuse ceramic body model would likely sound better.  

It is definitely a 5 x 20 mm size, slow blow.

[barrows]

19 minutes ago, w1000i said:

How do you evaluate the D90 compare to other DACs you tried ?

Please note this is specifically referring to the D-90 in "DAC mode" with DSD 256 input from a Signature Rendu SEoptical, with a Synergistic Orange fuse in the D-90.

 

It is a giant killer.  Not the best I've heard, but very, very good.  It probably needs to be paired with a good preamp to really shine, as the "DAC mode" defeats the volume control, and I do not think the output stage is quite beefy enough (current headroom) to drive amps directly, but at the price, heck, it is a no brainer.

 

There are better DACs, but the ones I know of all cost 10x as much or more...

[barrows]

1 hour ago, w1000i said:

Do you think it's better than Audio gd R7 (r2r) ?

Never heard it...  

[barrows]

There is no preamp cleaner than no preamp!  I prefer to not use a preamp at all, so I choose a DAC with a beefy enough (enough current headroom) to drive my amplifier directly.

 

[barrows]

6 hours ago, ambre said:

I have asked Topping a few weeks ago about the specs of the Fuse.

 

It is fastblow, 0.2A 5x20mm. 

So not a Slow Blow.

 

Like Barrows I will try at short notice also the attached fuse.

About why or is measurable etc. is and remains on ongoing debate. But I will trust my ears and especially my family If we hear really a difference and/ or improvement. But it is  a very high price😇

Wow!  That is really, really weird.  Typically, in every product I have ever been aware of over my 40 years of being an audiophile, I have never heard of any product which used a fast blow fuse for its main AC inlet fuse (fast blow fuses are often used internally in amplifier power supply rails to protect the output devices from burning at clipping).  The reason for this is that most components will draw the most current on the initial power up, because the power supply is entirely uncharged at this point, and the power supply capacitors act like a dead short until they are charged, hence there is a very "fast" and large inrush current, briefly; a slow blow fuse allows for brief periods of over current without blowing..  I am very surprised a 200 mA fast blow fuse could even survive as an AC input fuse in this DAC.

Sometimes "Audiophile" fuses blow more easily than their standard counterparts, probably because the Audiophile fuse makers err on the side of safety.  I have seen "Audiophile" fuses of the correct blow when they should not have, and sometimes it is necessary to raise the fuse value by one step to keep them from blowing when they should not.  Given the expense of these "Audiophile" fuses, i ma not sure I woudl put a fast blow, 200 mA, Synergistic Orange in this DAC, as I woudl be afraid it might blow at power up.  One might consider upping the value a little if they are going to use an "Audiophile" fuse.

 

Main AC input fuses basically protect the device from further damage if there has been an internal problem, they should only burn when there is an internal problem (a broken DAC which draws too much current, typically some kind of short somewhere in the circuit).  The fuse then fails to protect both the component from further damage, and from the possibility of catching fire.  I would not advise to change the fuse value recommended by Topping though...  but I know what I would do here.

[barrows]

6 minutes ago, ambre said:

Hi Barrows

Ok this make a lot of sense. Will contact  again Topping about this issue.

Ps. I am not willing to spend €150 + en it blows within a few minutes.

 

Please see attached the reaction by Topping.

Regards Andreas

I am not trying to deny that they use a fast blow fuse for AC input, I just find such spec very, very curious if it is so.  Note that a slow blow fuse is typically marked with a "T" designation on the endcap (the "T" denotes time delay).

 

If one does not want to spend a ton of cash on an Audiophile fuse, a high quality standard industrial part should still be a nice upgrade of the cheap fuse Topping uses.  I would recommend a ceramic body fuse from Littlefuse of the appropriate rating, these are around $1.50.

[barrows]

1 minute ago, ambre said:

Hi Barrows,

 

Already sent an rmail to Topping for clarification. May be a mistake?

Ps. I didn't removed the fuse yet may be the printing (if readable) gives the solution.

 

Do you still have the old fuse? What can you read on it ?

 

Regards, Andreas

No, I sold the D-90...

[barrows]

3 hours ago, 4est said:

The main AC fuse between the power transformer and the wall is not to protect the device, but to prevent fire and is required by UL and other organizations. By time it has blown the damage has typically been done to the unit. If they are looking to protect the device, they will put an additional one(s) inline between the power supply and the circuit and they are almost always fast blow. For that matter, most are fast blow IME, except for tube gear and big amps or oversized power supplies with lots of storage.

Umm, that is exactly what I said???  the fuse will only blow (if correctly specified) if there is already damage to the device.  Primary purpose of the AC line is to prevent fire, as we both stated.  The secondary purpose is to prevent further damage to the device:

For example:  If the D-90 were to develop a shorted output stage component, it would then draw excess current, which, primarily, could cause the unit to catch fire.  So primarily the fuse protects against that "large" problem.  But secondarily, a properly sized fuse will also blow early enough such that it usually prevents further damaged parts in the component.  This allows the component to survive, and only need a minor repair to be returned to proper working order (in may cases, not all of course, every failure mode is a little different).

I am certain we both know and fully understand this.  I am only posting more details for those who may not.

 

But you are mistaken if you are saying most AC line (input) fuses (in audio components) are specified as fast blow.  They usually need to be slow blow so that they do not blow with the higher current inrush at initial power up.  I have never seen a single audio component, be it line level or power amplifier, with a fast blow fuse specified for its AC input fuse before the D-90.

 

 

[barrows]

9 minutes ago, ambre said:

Hi 4est & Barrows, 

 

A lot of discussion and confusion now and not a straight answer yet.

What will it be: Fast Blow or Slow blow? What now is the safest type and functions well?

Please an understandable advice for a laymen.

 

Ps. Barrows promoted the Synergistic Research Orange.  If there is an underpinned measurement, blind test etc.... is a complete other kind of discussion. First of all I will trust my OldEars🤩.But it too costly to blow €155 within a few minutes of time.

 

Ps. In my Shanti Lineair Power Supply as counterpart for the Allo USBRidge they also describe Fast Blow (20mm fuse 500 mili amps Fast blow).🤭 

 

Please see attached today's reaction by Topping. They might also be confused. 🤯

You should use whatever type and (fast or slow) and whatever value is recommended/specified by the manufacturer.  Any other approach would likely void your warranty.  If you decide to use an "Audiophile" fuse, of the correct type and value, and it blows, you should then demand a warranty replacement from the (fuse) manufacturer, and see if they recommend upping the value a little.

And, the provided fuse is marked with both type (fast or slow) and value (mA).  If you cannot read it, get a magnifier and a bright light and post the markings here.  These will be stamped into one of the end caps.

[barrows]

3 minutes ago, ambre said:

Hi Barrows, it was you who questioned the choice of a Fast Blow fuse. Can't handle this way of reacting. Back to the end.

Have a nice evening.

And I still do, but I am not going to recommend to anyone to use a different type and value of fuse than what the manufacturer recommends.  Please understand this is both a safety and a liability issue.

 

Given the small amount of overall capacitance (energy storage) in the D-90, I can see that they could get away with a fast blow fuse.  Most DACs of my experience have many times more capacitance internally than the D-90, hence why most DACs are almost certain to have a slow blow fuse at the AC line input.

[barrows]

I hope that someone with a D-90 will actually read the included OE fuse and post the markings here, then we will have less confusion!  I am sorry to have contributed to that confusion.

 

One other thing though...  The D-90 is universal voltage, with an input voltage switch on the underside.  It may be that the fuse Topping includes is specified for 230 volt countries.  Typically, an AC line input fuse would be 1/2 the mA value for 230 volt countries than for here in the US (1115 Volts).  Perhaps Topping includes a fuse specified for 230 volt countries, to be safe in those countries, and then the value is a bit low for US voltage (but safe, as the fuse will blow even sooner).

 

An example:

 

For Sonore Power Supplies, I specify a 315 mA fuse for the US (115 VAC) and a 160 mA fuse for EU (230 VAC).  These supplies are fairly high in capacitance (hence there is a high inrush current when powering up), so these fuses are slow blow types. 

[barrows]

1 hour ago, BobSherman said:

I think allot of talk about the fuse for a $700 dac. IMO the fuse will make little difference. Not worth spending $150 for in this application IMO. Fast blow is also fine, it is not a power amp. Currently using the D90 I2s from a pi2aes, clearly better than usb imo.

As I mentioned, the fuse did make a difference here, and also that i would suggest a ~$1.50  quality, Littlefuse ceramic body fuse would likely be a nice improvement over the el cheapo glass body OE fuse, so no need to necessarily go with an expensive "audiophile" fuse to get an improvement.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Thanks Andreas - good to hear about future possibilities. I'm not about to invest in HQ Player at this time, but never say never in this hobby.  As mentioned, I've had brief forays into DSD in the past and didn't much like it - either sonically and especially the way it made my MBPro fry.  I use  an ST i5 these days but nevertheless I didn't find the SQ improvements I was supposed to be experiencing enough to torture my computer  Honestly I prefer the sound running 16/44 or 24/96. 

You already have Roon, it does a good job oversampling to DSD 256.  And it will do it on your ST I5 no problem (Roon oversampling is much more easy on computer power).  Really try DSD 256 input to the D-90 with Roon.  And be sure to run the D-90 in "DAC mode" so that the DSD 256 just goes straight to the conversion stage, I suspect you will have some good results.

 

Yes, HQPlayer is better with the EC modulators, but Roon does quite well with the D-90 at DSD 256.

[barrows]

@OldBigEars,  sure!  Here is what gave me the best SQ with the Topping, a Sonore Rendu, and Roon:

 

1.  Go to sponicorbiter.com, find your microRendu, and click "manage"

2.  Go to "settings"-roon-and change the DSD settings from DoP to native DSD, click "save" and make sure you get a confirmation message.

You are done with sonicorbiter,

 

Next:

In the settings menu for the D-90, set it to DAC mode, this disables the D-90 volume control, and for DSD input, enables the direct DSD mode of the D-90, this passes any DSD input direct to the conversions stage, bypassing any DSP, oversampling, or delta sigma modulation by the DAC.  See the D-90 manual for details

 

Next:

 

In Roon, tap the speaker icon in the bottom right corner, tap "DSP".  tap "Headroom Management", and set the value to -5 dB, this lowers the level before oversampling to avoid clipping during the oversampling process.  In the same field, set "Show Clipping Indicator" to "on".  This will tell you if you have an clipping during playback (if you do, you can lower the headroom management a couple more dB, but usually -5 dB is enough).  Tap, "Sample Rate Conversion", and set sample rate conversion to "DSD".  Set "DSD Sample Rate" to 256,  Set "Sample Rate Conversion Filter" to "Precise, Linear Phase" (I prefer this setting, but you can try others of course).  Set "Sigma Delta Modulator" to "7th order CLANS", leave "SDM Gain Adjustment" at "0", set "Parallelize Sigma-Delta Modulator" to "Yes", set "Enable Native DSD Processing" to "Yes".  The DSD to PCM settings are irrelevant.

Before you exit, double check on the left that "Headroom Management", and "Sample Rate Conversion" are enabled.

 

Exit the DSP menus and play some music, the D-90 should indicate DSD 256 as the input sample rate.  Be sure to control your volume via your amps volume control.  If you click not he white dot in Roon, it will reveal exactly what Roon is doing to the signal, and confirm your settings (during playback). 

[barrows]

8 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

@Barrows - thank you.  All working.  Two minutes in and already this sounds much better.

 

I'm excited....and will let you know how it goes.

 

@Mike - you're absolutely right.  This could work....

Nice!

[barrows]

50 minutes ago, firedog said:

Barrows-

Tried your settings on my ESS streamer/DAC and they sound quite good on that one, too, even though I think ESS DACs don't do direct conversion. 

I use these settings on my ESS 9038 DAC, and indeed you are right, you cannot bypass the DS modulator and DSP with the ESS chip.  Even though there is no DSD direct mode comparable to what is available on the AKM chips, I prefer the 

ESS 9038 with DSD 256 input. 

[barrows]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

 

ESS does fairly minimal processing for DSD, that's why it needs only three MCLK cycles per DSD sample. So it is certainly shortest available path through the chip, especially when run without ASRC/DPLL using synchronous clocks.

 

Hopefully they'll add direct mode in some future version, because their conversion stage architecture would fit that perfectly.

 

Yes, there is clearly a sound quality benefit to the lower processing.  And yes, I prefer to run synchronous clocking, where the bit clock and master clock are synchronous.  As I only play DSD 256, I have only a single 45.1584 MHz clock in my DIY DAC, just a single beating heart.  With my isolated/re-clocked USB interface I do have to run the 2x clock rate.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

Quick question about DSD.....when you’re upsampling from PCM to DSD 256 does it matter what quality of file you start with? In other words...any point in 24/96 files as opposed to using 16/44?

Yes, it matters.  I am assuming the file you start with is legit hi res here, originally recorded at the higher rate.

 

[barrows]

2 hours ago, OldBigEars said:

 

It would have to be a generalization of Tidal or Qobuz streaming for me.  I'm not in practice going to be able to make this a case by case assessment - life's too short

 

But as Mike says, much of what I listen to was recorded long before such technologies arrived.

 

Even with older recordings (which I am assuming are from analog tape masters), Hi Res transfers of them are very worthwhile IMO.  I especially like DSD transfers from older analog masters.

The reason I feel hi res recordings (or transfers/re-masters from analog) have an advantage is not because of the higher bandwidth and bit depth, but because of the influence the anti alias filter has on the sonics.  When one either lays down tracks digitally, or makes a digital transfer from analog, one has to have an anti alias filter before the A-D converter.  The higher the sample rate of the recording, the simpler and gentler this filter can be, and the less artifacts it will create in the digital result.

 

Of course all the usual caveats apply here as well, the quality of the original recording, and the mixing/mastering there of matter more than the final sample rate, etc, etc.  But given the choice between a hi res version and a redbook version of the same recording, I will always source the hi res version for my self because it can have advantages.  Whether or not one upsamples it later in playback is unrelated to this choice.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

Update -  after cooling down and rebooting the STi5, it restarted and seems to play normally again. 

 

I checked the Roon processing speed on a few albums. It seems to range from 1.5 - 2.0X. This seems low, compared to normal. 
 

I’m going to have to sleep on this.  DVD 256 apparently transforms the D90 but it appears my Sonic Transporter may not have sufficient core capacity to run it safely. 

If Roon is only running at 1.5 to 2.0 that is not good news.  I would recommend contacting Andrew at SGC and discussing with him.  I am not sure which I-5 the ST is using.  My Mac Mini is also an I-5 machine, and runs Roon oversampling to DSD 256 and 512 with no issues, and Roon shows always running fast 4X or higher.  Roon says that rates below 4x are getting close to borderline, so the problems which you are having are not that surprising, although, I am surprised the ST I5 is not able to run faster, perhaps it just needs a little more cooling?  A computer will throttle its capability if it gets too hot, anyway, Andrew is the man to consult with on this.

[barrows]

5 hours ago, OldBigEars said:

 

OK I'll try to reach Andrew.  Another factor is that I also run Convolution filters on Roon.  These are the HAF room correction filters.  I typically use the Crosstalk filter, which I've found to be effective.  I could disable the Crosstalk, or I could try DSD 128.  If Andrews got other ideas, that would be great.

Ahh, that explains it then.  I can understand how the convolution plus the oversampling could be too much for the I5.  I would see if Andrew can offer you a reasonable upgrade path to an ST I7...

[barrows]

13 minutes ago, Blake said:

@barrowsthanks for posting your Roon oversampling settings!  This is a great improvement in SQ and I am very appreciative.

 

 

So if HQPlayer is even better than Roon for oversampling, I think I will go ahead and do a trial of HQPlayer.  Would you mind posting your HQPlayer settings with the same step by step instructions (like you did for Roon)?  TIA

I do not normally run HQP (I do not have a powerful enough machine) so i do not remember my settings really...  I stuck mostly with defaults, with EC7 modulator and poly since ext2 filter, I think?  The filter is recommended by Jussi.  The EC modulators are only possible up to DSD 256, and one needs a very powerful computer to run the, I-9 9900K is basically recommended.  If you go into the HQP threads here there is plenty of discussion on settings!

[barrows]

10 minutes ago, Blake said:

 

Ok, thanks for the additional info.  My MacBook Pro (2011 i7 2.2Ghz) won't be up to the task then.  But your Roon settings sound great anyway so I am a happy camper!

Yeah, this is why I ma not using HQP, but do not listen to it if you do not want to get a new computer/server capable of running it!  I just do not have time/money right now to have a custom server built, but the EC modulator with dSD 256 sounded sooo good!

At some point i have to figure out  set up for it....