DAC Manufacturer Aversion To External DSP

[Miska]

1 minute ago, Albrecht said:

I see your point. But one definitely needs a DAC that will accept DSD signal as an input. 

 

Not necessarily.

 

2 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

I guess were I was confused was the difference between DSP and Digital Signal Conversion....???

 

DSP is essential piece of converting your regular source media to analog these days. Conversion process consists of two pieces, the DSP part and the D/A section that converts output of the DSP section to analog. It makes sense to keep these two separate.

 

3 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

I would love to hear a demonstration of what you're doing vs what is going on in a well implemented DAC that does the conversion there.... (every appropriate DAC is well north of $12K).

 

Haha, price is not defining factor here. But you could get started with T+A SDV 3100 HV. It can take directly DSD1024 network input from HQPlayer and convert it to analog through a bit-perfect discrete D/A section. This was also demonstrated at Munich High-End 2019 at the T+A booth.

 

7 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

(if HQPlayer doesn't run on a NAS)

 

NAS are badly under powered and otherwise unsuitable for such tasks. But just I built a pretty nice i9-10900K server from parts for the purpose. Without GPU the parts cost was around 1800 EUR. With a nice RTX2080Ti GPU you would add some 1600 EUR to it. Compared to audio components you are talking about, pretty decently priced, especially given that it has so much more processing power!

 

[asdf1000]

3 hours ago, Albrecht said:

With respect, - I must be confused, - as I thought that the topic was "manufacturers aversion to external DSP" 

 

this would include, - in my mind, - how I took it as a hardware discussion, - about why manufacturers don't build in things like galvanic isolation "moats" into their USB inputs. I recognize that this include USB processing software like exists with HQPlayer. 

 

(It seems like I am cray, didn't read carefully, or made a grossly wrong assumption about this being primarily a hardware discussion). 

 

the ONLY reason to ever use HQPlayer in my mind is to get DSD, - and some people don't have that capability or the recordings to do so. If I want DSD level performance, - I am going to go get it from APL, - who is the expert on this stuff. I have had the DirectStream DAC in my system, - and well.... it's not a product that "belongs" with the rest of my system. 

 

I have no experience with HQ Player. So, - it would be wrong to comment on it in any way. Just like hardware, (which is prolly something like 80 to 90% of any final product), that should be addressed first IMO.

 

I don't know how many folks are or are not comparing $2K Schiit DACs to $2K Audio Aero Prima's with a Singxer SU-1 from 20 years ago: but i bet that many people would be very very surprised.....

 

With respect, you posted both of the below comments in the same post, but it's not accurate:

 

"the ONLY reason to ever use HQPlayer in my mind is to get DSD"

 

and

 

"I have no experience with HQ Player. So, - it would be wrong to comment on it in any way."

 

[Albrecht]

16 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

 

With respect, you posted both of the below comments in the same post, but it's not accurate:

 

"the ONLY reason to ever use HQPlayer in my mind is to get DSD"

 

and

 

"I have no experience with HQ Player. So, - it would be wrong to comment on it in any way."

 

GAAAH...

 

I meant SQ: Of course I didn't actually write that...... i should've specified because I also wrote "in any way," bad on my part.

 

But I also wrote that I respect others who use HQPlayer and I respect Miska for making good arguments......

 

[R1200CL]

12 hours ago, Albrecht said:

"Do you actually know what a Singxer SU-1 is ?"

 

I've had one in my system for more than 3 years. Currently I use the Gustard U-16 with a Cardas USB cable from my ultra-Rendu... (Debating going to an Audio-GD i20 at 5 times the price, - but not sure). 

 

Sounds GRREAAAAT....  

 

I happen also to use a SU-1. (Modified). And it’s not 20 years old 😂. I guess the age was the DAC. It seems we both doesn’t have a DAC with USB interface. Correct ?

I use a Theta Generation Vlll (PCM 24/192 max). 
 

What DAC are you using, and why would you even consider the Audio-GD i20 ?

 

I also use a SonicTransporter with HQPlayer.

If you’re only using PCM, you can probably install HQPlayer in your NAS. At least if it’s a QNAP. Are you using Roon ? And if yes, where is it installed, or what player are you using ?

[R1200CL]

@Albrecht

 I found your DAC 😀

 

 

Which lead me to 

Maybe APL will produce a product with fiber Ethernet in ?

Not sure if APL DAC’s accepts DSD 512. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, R1200CL said:

Not sure if APL DAC’s accepts DSD 512. 

Yes, the DSD-MR MK2 accepts DSD512, but not the DSD-SR MK2. That's the flagship DAC and I'm unsure if other models will get the same DSP in the future. 

[R1200CL]

I’ve just noticed APL has its own streamer condensed from Auralic. 
https://aplhifi.com/products/digital-3/dnp-sr/#1588695658168-2f4a1e86-5773

 

APL also seems to have a special output (i2s ?) to only be used with their DAC’s. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

22 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

I’ve just noticed APL has its own streamer condensed from Auralic. 
https://aplhifi.com/products/digital-3/dnp-sr/#1588695658168-2f4a1e86-5773

 

APL also seems to have a special output (i2s ?) to only be used with their DAC’s. 

 

I have a DSD-SR here and love it. I also asked Alex from APL about the DTR input/output and published his answers in my recent DSD-SR MK2 review you linked to above. 

 

Here is the review where I talk more about the streamer. 

 

 

[Albrecht]

 

5 hours ago, R1200CL said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 hours ago, R1200CL said:

@Albrecht

 I found your DAC

 

 

 

 

 

I have a dream....   ......

 

I wish... and given what I know of APL (reflected in the review) it is a great DAC and likely a very big step up from mine: true SOTA.

Cheers,

 

[Albrecht]

9 hours ago, R1200CL said:

 

I happen also to use a SU-1. (Modified). And it’s not 20 years old 😂. I guess the age was the DAC. It seems we both doesn’t have a DAC with USB interface. Correct ?

I use a Theta Generation Vlll (PCM 24/192 max). 
 

What DAC are you using, and why would you even consider the Audio-GD i20 ?

 

I also use a SonicTransporter with HQPlayer.

If you’re only using PCM, you can probably install HQPlayer in your NAS. At least if it’s a QNAP. Are you using Roon ? And if yes, where is it installed, or what player are you using ?

Hi,

I have been very impressed with Theta DACs that I've heard, - FWIW. 

I have a QNAP NAS that runs either LMS or MiniMServer depending on my mood. I like running LMS for convenience and in our building we have 8 different LMS endpoints/or Squeezebox/squeezebox emulators running: so it's mostly just laziness that I don't flip the ultraRendu to MPD/DLNA. 

But I've found that running MiniMServer via Fiber, to my ultraRendu is a just a little better sound quality.

I just have a 24/192 RCA SPDIF input on my APL Universal player. WHen I want to run-DSD, - I just play SACDs. But the quality of the ultraRendu/Gustard/QNAP is almost as good as playing SACDs on my system. 

 

I am thinking of moving to the Audio-GD because everyone is reporting that the Audio-GD blows away the Gustard. But i do not know exactly how they are applying it. Plus, - would the Audio-GD or upgrading to the opticalRendu be the better call? 

IMO the Gustard is a step up from the Singxer, Audiophelio, Berkeley, etc. 

 

 

Cheers,

 

[Bob Stern]

RME apparently embraces HQPlayer because the user guide for the RME ADI-2 DAC mentions it twice: as being compatible with RME's "DSD Direct" mode, and as the only Mac music player that passed RME's 32-bit "bit perfect" test.  

 

(Interesting aside: without naming names, RME's user guide said other music player software claiming to have a Direct Mode using non-mixable 32-bit integer format failed RME's bit perfect test.)

 

The RME ADI-2 can only handle DSD up to DSD256, so it's behind Holo Spring, Denafrips and T+A in that respect.

[StreamFidelity]

On 7/5/2020 at 8:32 PM, barrows said:

The Denafrips has no output stage and high output impedance

 

I apologize for commenting on an older post. I just discovered this thread.

 

It is correct that the Denafrips (in my case Terminator DAC) has no output stage. Fortunately!

 

Why am I say this?

 

Because I tried a comparison with the preamplifier section of the T + A PA 3000 HV with the direct output of the Terminator DAC at my T + A M10 power amplifiers. I heard the comparison with a sound engineer and we both came to the same judgment. Without the T + A preamplifier, the sound was incredibly faster with a deep, precise bass. The space spread out more. I sold the PA 3000 HV. 

 

How is that possible?

 

Two things have to fit:

1. The output voltage must be high enough: XLR at 4.6Vrms, 1250 Ω
2. High quality digital volume control (in my case via the HQPlayer)

 

I don't want to hide one disadvantage. The output from the terminator is so sensitive that recalibrating DSD causes a slight crackle. As from a Turntable. That is wonderfully analog. 😂

[Jud]

6 hours ago, Bob Stern said:

 

(Interesting aside: without naming names, RME's user guide said other music player software claiming to have a Direct Mode using non-mixable 32-bit integer format failed RME's bit perfect test.)

 

Audirvana's Direct Mode hasn't been available for many iterations of MacOS. I think the check box may be selectable even on MacOS versions where it isn't available, so the UI may cause some confusion.

[matthias]

14 minutes ago, Jud said:

Audirvana's Direct Mode hasn't been available for many iterations of MacOS. I think the check box may be selectable even on MacOS versions where it isn't available, so the UI may cause some confusion.

 

At least with High Sierra DM is not selectable, so the UI seems to be correct.

 

Matt

[Bob Stern]

6 hours ago, Jud said:

Audirvana's Direct Mode hasn't been available for many iterations of MacOS.

 

Hi, Jud!  I thought there was a hack to install a kext that enabled Direct Mode on later Mac OS versions.

[mav52]

I've seen a few DAC manufacturers that feel the filter they chose is the best for all.  Even though the chip they used has numerous filter settings the manufacturer doesn't allow access to the filters.

[Jud]

44 minutes ago, Bob Stern said:

 

Hi, Jud!  I thought there was a hack to install a kext that enabled Direct Mode on later Mac OS versions.

 

There is but I assume RME wasn't using a hacked OS for its tests.

[wklie]

On 7/1/2020 at 8:49 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I’m a huge fan of choice and would prefer a DAC that enables the best of both worlds, the manufacturers best and the option to select what I think is best externally.

 

I've given some thought about choice in the context of ESS DAC.  ESS offers multiple filters and a variety of register settings, many of which might affect SQ.  A whole spectrum of the range of choices would be possible.  At one extreme, I've seen an ESS DAC exposing almost the whole register set configurable via the front panel.  Except for the DIY community, it would be too confusing for most users.  A simple and valid question like "what settings sound best" would be unanswerable.

 

At the other extreme like our products, we leave no choice to users (other than DSD upsampling, which marketing considers to be important).  We never had selectable filter in our product line.  Before the release of our ES9038PRO based flagship product, I read a number of reviews of ESS DAC and gathered filter preferences from multiple reviewers.  I researched the public discussions of filters, read opinions from experts like Miska and other manufacturers, and consulted an expert in private.  I also had a group of users did a blind filter test for me and have come to the conclusion that a selectable filter would be worthwhile.  Instead of exposing all the ESS filters, in an attempt to balance between choice and confusion, I proposed that we should have two filters.  Unfortunately, it was unanimously banned by all our decision makers.  Anyway, we keep our "house sound".

[barrows]

5 minutes ago, wklie said:

 

I've given some thought about choice in the context of ESS DAC.  ESS offers multiple filters and a variety of register settings, many of which might affect SQ.  A whole spectrum of the range of choices would be possible.  At one extreme, I've seen an ESS DAC exposing almost the whole register set configurable via the front panel.  Except for the DIY community, it would be too confusing for most users.  A simple and valid question like "what settings sound best" would be unanswerable.

 

At the other extreme like our products, we leave no choice to users (other than DSD upsampling, which marketing considers to be important).  We never had selectable filter in our product line.  Before the release of our ES9038PRO based flagship product, I read a number of reviews of ESS DAC and gathered filter preferences from multiple reviewers.  I researched the public discussions of filters, read opinions from experts like Miska and other manufacturers, and consulted an expert in private.  I also had a group of users did a blind filter test for me and have come to the conclusion that a selectable filter would be worthwhile.  Instead of exposing all the ESS filters, in an attempt to balance between choice and confusion, I proposed that we should have two filters.  Unfortunately, it was unanimously banned by all our decision makers.  Anyway, we keep our "house sound".

Thanks for providing a manufacturer's perspective.

 

This leaves me, personally, even more convinced that there could be enough demand in the marketplace for a very simple DAC, designed specifically for users who desire to oversample in software.  I am thinking a DAC designed for DSD 256 input (and up) only, which would use a discrete DSD conversion stage, include enough oomph in the output stage to drive amplifiers directly, and have a bypassable analog volume control (for those who might not be willing to fully trust VC in software).

While HQPlayer would be recommended, outstanding performance would also be available form other players, such as Roon, and Daphile, which both have good conversion to DSD (unfortunately Audirvana still does not allow for DSD-DSD oversampling, although Audirvana would work for those people who have no DSD files). 

[R1200CL]

Hi @Bimmer100

I know you don’t design your DAC’s, but I expect you have a close dialogue with the designer. 
Isn’t the Spring DAC actually doing up to DSD 1024 without any internal processing (filters and modulators) ?

So your DAC’s should fit perfectly into what Chris like to see. 
(He should probably even ask to review a Holo DAC when he’s finished with his Caps part two. Maybe compare it against T+A) 😀

Do you see a cheaper version with only DC in and no PCM as a possibility ?

 

How do you see the possibility to implement an Ethernet interface into your DAC’s ?

In post #11 Barrows have some suggestions about output stage in general as he like to bypass the need of a preamp and go directly to amplifiers. Something under consideration ?

 

 

[One and a half]

6 hours ago, wklie said:

 Anyway, we keep our "house sound".

To that end, the 'house sound' is pretty darn good!

[One and a half]

6 hours ago, barrows said:

Thanks for providing a manufacturer's perspective.

 

This leaves me, personally, even more convinced that there could be enough demand in the marketplace for a very simple DAC, designed specifically for users who desire to oversample in software.  I am thinking a DAC designed for DSD 256 input (and up) only, which would use a discrete DSD conversion stage, include enough oomph in the output stage to drive amplifiers directly, and have a bypassable analog volume control (for those who might not be willing to fully trust VC in software).

While HQPlayer would be recommended, outstanding performance would also be available form other players, such as Roon, and Daphile, which both have good conversion to DSD (unfortunately Audirvana still does not allow for DSD-DSD oversampling, although Audirvana would work for those people who have no DSD files). 

By simple DAC, do you mean an R2R type?

[barrows]

15 minutes ago, One and a half said:

By simple DAC, do you mean an R2R type?

No, not for me, R2R is for PCM only, i prefer DSD conversion, as DSD conversion (at a high enough input sample rate) can be achieved by a fairly simple circuit, and have excellent linearity (unlike r2R for PCM with is fraught with linearity problems).

There have been a number of DSD conversion approaches done discretely, but most of them use some kind of high speed switch, followed by a filter circuit.  I do not know what the "best" approach of these is, figuring that out would likely take some development.  A version of Jussi's DSC approach is likely to produce very good results with enough attention to the details and excellent engineering.

 

When I say simple, mainly I am referring to not having any (or possibly just a simple bit to a much higher rate from an already high rate input) processing on the signal in the DAC, so no need for FPGAs or DSP chips doing all kinds of digital manipulation, instead, just the receiver circuit (USB or optical Ethernet) and the re-clocking stage, then input direct to the discrete converter.