Jump to content

opus101

  • Content Count

    820
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    China

1 Follower

About opus101

  • Rank
    Sophomoric Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Hangzhou, PRC

Recent Profile Visitors

4205 profile views
  1. Its currently $125 for a single year, discounts are available if you wish to pay in advance for future years. (I'm an ex-AES member).
  2. This board is entirely plausible as a DAP. There's a card slot bottom left, a USB (C?) socket left centre and an audio out jack above that. On the right halfway down there's a connector that looks like it could feed an LCD screen. Right at the bottom there's an RF connector perhaps for BT or WiFi. The only mystery to me is why the 4 off ES9038Q2M DAC chips for a stereo unit? Do they need to headline an exceptionally low noise floor through paralleling?
  3. To me, all the details of a converter are important, though not all equally so. The DAC chip used pretty much sets the ceiling of the performance. The power supplies and I/V stage will indicate something about how much dynamic contrast is going to be possible. The PCB layout will in general indicate how much extraneous 'gunk' is likely to be injected into the wanted signal. In the case of TDA1543 the on-chip current source is a significant weakness, to get the best from it its necessary to disable that (pin7 left OC) and use an external one to bias up the passive I/V re
  4. I use a bare PCB variant of this : https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?spm=a230r.1.14.191.7fe65362yPipCw&id=17000975098&ns=1&abbucket=20#detail
  5. Having had one of these DACs I'd not opt for the internal USB card. Rather get yourself an external USB->S/PDIF and run the DAC through its S/PDIF input. The PCB layout doesn't lend itself to a particularly low noise floor on USB.
  6. There is a long history of those kinds of arguments from the industry. The one that comes to mind is 'Digital music piracy is hurting musicians', going even further back 'Home taping is killing music'.
  7. In the sense of 'If you like your current digital filter, you can keep your current digital filter' ?
  8. A review well worth waiting for George, thanks. So to summarize what you're saying is this is a DAC which assists the listener to make sense of the recording. I completely get that - I like the 'I can parse what the bass player's doing....' (paraphrased), of the Yamaha - 'you can hear it but you can't make out the individual notes'.
  9. If you have some soldering and mech skills you could make the DI box yourself using these : https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32810421236.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.fbd65923uNsxN3&algo_pvid=af4d2c53-7ec4-4594-8653-c566c00bf0f0&algo_expid=af4d2c53-7ec4-4594-8653-c566c00bf0f0-0&btsid=0bb47a1a16074387307478521e098b&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_,searchweb201603_
  10. Ferrites will make a difference but it'll probably be too small an improvement to solve your issue. I'd go for the passive DI solution myself but where does such a box cost $600? It only needs to contain a couple of (fairly cheap) isolation transformers. Its possible to use the XLR inputs of your speakers with unbalanced outputs from the DAC but it needs an XLR-RCA cable. That option should be considerably cheaper than the DI but probably won't work quite as well. Might work well enough though.
  11. How do you know this? Got any examples? In my experiments a large part of how an amp sounds is the power supply. In other words, the PSRR is very important.
  12. D- and D+ are complementary (balanced) signals, meaning there's only a single bit being sent at a time, but with two polarities. This is to allow noise pick-up to be cancelled.
  13. Then there was at least one 'good reason'!
  14. That's your perception which you're entitled to. My own is radically different - its been most enlightening.
×
×
  • Create New...