We need a new standard in transferring digital signals between audio equipment.

[kdubious]

A (typical) DAC chip is going to need I2S and great clocks nearby. Plus very clean power.

 

A (typical / ideal) network player / digital transport / streamer needs an Ethernet input (maybe WiFi) and great clocks. Plus very clean power.

 

We make a streamer that outputs I2S on an HDMI cable. We make a DAC that accepts it. The best sound I've gotten from the pair is when the player lives in the DAC chassis, and instead of the required 3.3V TTL I2S > LVDS (over an HDMI cable) > 3.3V TTL I2S, the player feeds the DAC board. (There's galvanic isolation in play, of course)

 

A "purist" might scream that Ethernet = PC, and that no PC parts are allowed in an Audiophile Grade DAC. (To that, I'd suggest that USB = PC... and camera, and printer, and a ton of other garbage, and USB is almost always in there... but I digress)

 

You can mitigate the PC issues with multiple power supplies / regulators and proper galvanic isolation.

 

The gain is 2 fewer signal translations (to LVDS for the HDMI cable and back to TTL for the DAC chip), and a clock "right next to" the DAC chip.

 

What we have then is a DAC with an internal streamer... a Network DAC.

 

What am I missing?

[kdubious]

@Rexp We had one based on the Burr Brown PCM1794. But 24/192 is a little behind the times in the mind of most people. I can't decide whether to build on the ESS SABRE DAC chip (which I typically do not love the sound of) or to create a ladder DAC. Then there's DSD and MQA to contend with, too.

Anyhow, it would be 6+ months before Musica Pristina has an "Ethernet DAC" or a "Network DAC" or a "Streaming DAC."

[kdubious]

@miska 

Quote

No, this is where it goes horribly wrong.

"Horrible"? Should I assume you've never heard a USB DAC?

[kdubious]

@PeterSt 

Quote

Take the PCM1704U-K then (24/768)

Seven hundred sixty eight what from that chip?

[kdubious]

@Cebolla 

Quote

This should sort out the contention

If only it did.

[kdubious]

@Miska I feel like I'm missing something that you are trying to say. Can you point me to some details on NAA?

[kdubious]

5 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Sure. For more than 10 years by now and always on (24/7). And 10+ years more, but nobody knew.

And now you have chips to sell? Or DAC boards?

[kdubious]

@Superdad 

Quote

If only XX-HighEnd had an user interface that his mother could love...

@PeterSt

I know a software guy with some UI skills 😊

[kdubious]

@PeterSt 

Quote

On the first page of this thread I mentioned the Juli@t audio interface card.

Dave and I used to make a daughter card for the Juli@ that output I2S as LVDS over HDMI.

[kdubious]

@PeterSt I saw (once upon a time) that XXHighEnd requires .NET? What's the UI Written in?

[kdubious]

@PeterSt WinForms or WPF? Does it need  some UX love? It’s not open source, right?

[kdubious]

@Cebolla “doesn't automatically convince you”

Sorry, but I think you misread my intention. I meant that the article has not convinced “everyone” that MQA is a bad idea. We (Musica Pristina) and I (Kevin Welsh) don’t support MQA, except perhaps in a roundabout way by having a Tidal account. Lossy is not good. WAV files are awesome. And we don’t need a new monopoly on content.

[kdubious]

Sincere Question: what problem are you trying to solve?

 

I just read the thread to catch up, and I can’t figure out the ultimate goal. You end up needing to clock I2S or DSD into a DAC chip, or a ladder, right?