Thanks! No I'm using the MCLK from the Musiland - same as I'm doing with the HiFace. Thanks for pointing this out - I'm intending to experiment with asynch clocks when I get a few in various speeds!
I've done my last batch of listening through budget headphones - Sony MDR-XD200 direct from the Vouts of the ESS - probably not ideal load for the Vout but the sound is stunning (it would be interesting running into a good headphone amp & good headphones). My amplifier, at the moment, is a stop-gap one TA2020 with Jordan JX92s DIY speakers.
I think that's the main reason for the difference in sound. the 128fs from musiland is non-optimal for the ESS, whereas the 256/512 fs from hiface meets spec. I bet the internal upsampler is not working to its full potential
In the wolfson dac I use, if you feed a 128fs mck, the internal upsampler doesn't work at top rate. Only medium rate and zero upsampling.
Wow, you are probably violating the minimum impedance requirement for the output. What does the spec sheet says? For the wolfson DAC, it requires 1K load minimum.
You may have a point there, Guillermo but the sound was just a little better than the Musiland before the mods (this is from memory as I couldn't do A/B with the Musiland) & after mods, well you have my report above - big jump
. I need to look into 176 & 192KHz as the Hiface is using 128fs at these speeds. So you would also have a problem with the HiFace at 176.4 & 192KHz samplerate then?
Yea, I was iffy about this as the ESS datasheet says a minimum load resistance of 5K & the phones are only 70ohm.
What are the sonic or otherwise implications of this apart from blowing the DAC's output stage? I had been running the DAC through Sescom 600:600 transformer without difficulty & to be honest there is no difference in sound that I can determine!
The requirements for those sample rates are only 128fs. I think it is because the upsampler doesn't have to work all the way to the max (all the way meaning 48 -> 192).
In any case, with speakers, I can't tell the difference between different internal sample rates
Oh, so it's probably OK at 128fs with the ESS DAC then - the actual quote from the datasheet is "For best performance, 256fs or greater is recommended for 32KHz to 96KHz sampling" - I was wondering about >96KHz & now you've cleared that up.
I know, I don't have much material at these higher rates so I'm not too worried!
How about this one:
VIA Debuts World’s First USB 2.0 Audio Controller | NordicHardware
World’s First USB 2.0 Audio Controller? Huh?
VIA Debuts World’s First USB 2.0 Audio Controller | NordicHardware
World’s First USB 2.0 Audio Controller? Huh?
Doesn't say if the USB receiver is asynchronous?
Phrases like "Internal oscillator" " Cinema Quality sound" Looks like it's made for the consumer market.
Makes sense, since you're describing a 1:1 transformer, so the prior load was the same as the load now.
I had run the DAC with 600:600 output transformers (DCR of about 70ohm) & all sounded excellent.
Now I run it with no transformers & headphone (70ohm load) directly attached to DAC outputs & it sounds excellent
So what you're saying is that the load is the same in both cases? Yes but I think that the reactance of the transformer comes into play and at 20Hz it represents about >10K load to the DAC.
To be honest, I'm not sure that the direct headphone output isn't slightly better than transformer? More experimentation needed
That's about right, depending on the transformer. They tend to rise sharply from DCR above about 10Hz. By 20Hz it can be a few 1000 ohms.
So is my statement of >10K at 20Hz incorrect - should that read >10K at 20KHz?
I can't explain why the sound is just as good with headphones direct i.e 70 ohm load where 5K is recommended? Any thoughts? It should effect Bass I presume & if anything bass is better with more texture to it?
Hi All,
In responce to Jkeny driving headphones direct, this is actaully fine to do. When the DAC is connected to a I/V converter, the DAC see's a 0 Ohm impedance, just as if it was shorted to ground. SO dont worry about blowing the output stage, this will never happen by driving heaphones direct. Each pin on the DAC has about a 780 Ohm output impedance, so 4 in parallel is about 195 Ohm. You will simply get a voltage division from the 195 Ohms and the load of the headphones.
I saw some discussion about why 128Fs does sound a good as the 256Fs. This is true as the lower sample rate (96kHz and below, since the noise shaped modulator using this clock to move the quantizations noise out of the audio band. When running with a slower clock, this noise is now nearing the audio band and your ears can detect it.
Dustin
In responce to Jkeny driving headphones direct, this is actaully fine to do. When the DAC is connected to a I/V converter, the DAC see's a 0 Ohm impedance, just as if it was shorted to ground. SO dont worry about blowing the output stage, this will never happen by driving heaphones direct. Each pin on the DAC has about a 780 Ohm output impedance, so 4 in parallel is about 195 Ohm. You will simply get a voltage division from the 195 Ohms and the load of the headphones.
I saw some discussion about why 128Fs does sound a good as the 256Fs. This is true as the lower sample rate (96kHz and below, since the noise shaped modulator using this clock to move the quantizations noise out of the audio band. When running with a slower clock, this noise is now nearing the audio band and your ears can detect it.
Dustin
What really matters is what was the load after the transformer. Still headphones? If yes, the load the dac saw previously was roughly the headphones+DCR = 140ohm and now is just 70ohm. Either load would be suboptimal for an opamp and probably cause some very measurable increase in distortion.
Last edited:
I hear what you're saying analog_sa but even if I put a 5K or 10K R across the trafo primaries, I hear no difference in the sound with headphones attached to the secondaries.
I presume this very measurable increase in distortion would be obvious to the only THD analyzer that I have, my ears? So I don't know what is going on here - any ideas?
I presume this very measurable increase in distortion would be obvious to the only THD analyzer that I have, my ears? So I don't know what is going on here - any ideas?
Is your ES9022 running in stereo mode? I don't have the datasheet for that chip, but the ESS chips I've seen are all 8 channel. When the 8 channels are combined into 2 for stereo, the load is given as minimum 600 ohms.
You may be getting more distortion in the low end with the direct headphone load. That may sound "fuller" because of the extra harmonics. If you like it, why not?
You may be getting more distortion in the low end with the direct headphone load. That may sound "fuller" because of the extra harmonics. If you like it, why not?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.