Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About barrows

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    High above Boulder

Recent Profile Visitors

12652 profile views
  1. Bingo! I suspect the above is correct. The Ayre DAC runs proprietary oversampling in an FPGA at a 16x rate, and if one inputs 176.5/192 kHz into the Ayre it will still apply its own oversampling to get the rest of the way to 705.6 and 768 kHz.
  2. I would not make the same assumption. Getting their XMOS USB interface (I am playing with a $99 DAC board right now which handles native DSD 512 input no problem through its USB/XMOS input) to work at Native DSD 512 is an entirely different thing than coding the OS for their Ethernet Renderer. It would be interesting to know more about their DSD conversion approach. Often these "pure" DSD approaches work quite a bit better with DSD 256 and DSD 512-it makes me wonder if they are oversampling DSD in their processing chip to a higher rate. In any case, with a "pure" DSD converter, Bricasti would be advised that supporting higher DSD rates will only help their sales.
  3. I wonder what they are using for USB hardware wise, if it is XMOS getting higher rates of native DSD to work should not be very difficult. Also, if Bricasti has a lack in the coding area (internally or amongst their consultants) I would find it hard to believe they developed their own Ethernet interface.
  4. I would really to hear some more details about this DAC. For example: in the DSD section: is this a discrete conversion solution (non IC, low pass filter approach)? Does the DAC do the DSD conversion at its native rate (DSD 64 and DSD 128) or does it use its processing power to increase the sample rate before the conversion (remaining one bit)? Is the DSD conversion section the same as it is in the M21? It sounds like it may be... Also, considering it allows for a native DSD path, why does the DAC not allow for higher DSD rates? 4x and 8x DSD are popular for those who like to oversample in software (and there is more music available recorded at DSD x4 every day from Channel Classics and Reference Recordings). I certainly hope that Bricasti will consider upgrades to all of their DACs allowing for up to DSD 512 rates. I am impressed that Bricasti has been able to produce what appears to be a very, very nice, DAC, with a quality build, in the USA, at a very reasonable price.
  5. I should probably not try and read into what Paul has said further, and I would just be speculating. As to whether balanced power is "good" for SMPS, or not, I think it would be a big generalisation to suggest either way. The first step (after the input filter) in a SMPS is to rectify the AC to DC, and once that happens certainly the rest of the circuitry could care less if the incoming AC was balanced before rectification. I am no expert on SMPS though... Maybe someone reading here might know more about SMPS design and how balanced power might affect it? From the level of understanding I do have, I do not see how having balanced power coming in would be a "problem" for a SMPS.
  6. @skatbelt, This is an interesting question. I think it is likely true that not all power supplies will "like" balanced power at their input. Back in the old days, of the earlier generation PS Audio Regenerators (the P-300, P-600, P-500, & P-1000), SMPS would often make trouble for those PS audio regenerators. This trouble was actually caused by the high amount of capacitance that SMPS had across the AC line a their input. This large amount of capacitance was often a problem for these older Regenerator designs to power (being essentially power amplifier circuits the Regenerators did not like a lot of capacitive loading). I do not know if the current PS Audio regenerators (which are considerably different in design) have the same issue with SMPS loading. This may be the reason for Paul's posting RE balanced power and SMPS, or it may not be. As to your situation, I would contact Chord technical support directly, and ask them point blank if there is any detriment to powering the DAVE via balanced power as you are. There are so many factors involved in power supply design, that it would probably be assuming a lot to make a general recommendation. Of course, balanced power is not "standard", so if in doubt, one is a bit "safer" to not use balanced power. I would be interested to hear what Chord has to say about this in reference to DAVE.
  7. Actually, if Sonore had charged a typical 5x the BOM cost of the EMI absorbing material we use, the additional charge to the customer would have to be way more than what we do charge for it. This material is relatively expensive to purchase. The material we use is nothing obscure or anything, just a proven industrial material from a reliable electronic parts supplier which can absorb some of the noise inside the chassis. if one is still curious about EMI absorbing materials, a quick Google Search for "EMI absorbing materials" or EMI absorbing sheets" will reveal a number of results.
  8. Mike, glad you have it running! after 24 hours or so, please let us know how you like the sound!
  9. In a given Network interfacing scenario, I would make the general recommendation that the longest run of cable should be handled by the optical cable. Fiber optic Network cabling has lower losses than copper wire based Network cable, so run the fiber optic cable for whatever your longest run is, to the Rendu with optical input. This approach also places the noisy commercial computer gear (FMC, Router, Switch, Server, etc) at more of a distance from the audio system, which can only be an advantage.
  10. This DAC is on my radar. For a component made in the USA it appears to offer fair value for what appears to be high build quality. The interest for me is in the DSD DAC... The specifications suggest the DSD circuit is very close to that of the M21. It would be nice to learn more details of the DSD conversion approach applied. I suspect the analog circuits will be fine, being Bricasti.
  11. No, I just stuck with iZotope as I do not have a ton of time to play around too much with filters. Anyway, the settings you might like may be different from what I like, as there is no "perfect" filter with 44.1 PCM. There are just trade offs. One thing I seem to like is, as the DAC gets more refined, to go more with linear phase filters and move away from minimum phase.
  12. I generally used these settings: Steepness: 40.00 Cut: .93 Length: 500000 Pre-ring: .75 This gives about -120 dB at 22KHz, so good alias suppression and the slightly early cut off should reduce artifacts from the ADC process. This early cut off does not reduce audible high frequency content, really, as the FR result is only about -1 dB at 20 KHz.
  13. I can also confirm perfect DSD 256 performance with Amanero USB interfaces running on 1099c via Sonore Rendu renderers (linux based). This is with Native DSD (no DoP).
  14. Definitely am liking the sound of the 2018 remaster here...
  15. I see you have a Benchmark DAC, that uses an ESS chip, right? I really prefer running DSD into ESS chips, have you tried oversampling to DSD?
  • Create New...