Russ...
I suspect it will be well worth the wait! I have an interim solution, so it is easier for me to be patient, but I am expecting great thinmgs from your XMOS implementation, very excited...
I am hoping for DSD support, perhaps via the dCS 24/176.4 packing method-it seems like this might be possible with the XMOS chip...
I suspect it will be well worth the wait! I have an interim solution, so it is easier for me to be patient, but I am expecting great thinmgs from your XMOS implementation, very excited...
I am hoping for DSD support, perhaps via the dCS 24/176.4 packing method-it seems like this might be possible with the XMOS chip...
The dCS spec for DSD with XMOS is not only possible but it is already available.
I've been beta testing it for a while now using mpd compiled with dCS spec DSD support. You can check it out at XCore.
Russ,
I am making room in my new BIII case for just the Teleporter module to handle the future USB device you are working on. I have read that you may include the ability to synchronize the master clock on the BIII with the output rate of the USB device? I planned on putting the USB converter by my computer source and then run the CAT5 line up to the DAC. Will I be losing any functionality doing it this way. Thanks.
I am making room in my new BIII case for just the Teleporter module to handle the future USB device you are working on. I have read that you may include the ability to synchronize the master clock on the BIII with the output rate of the USB device? I planned on putting the USB converter by my computer source and then run the CAT5 line up to the DAC. Will I be losing any functionality doing it this way. Thanks.
That will depend on the the USB bus controller of your PC... some will have the juice for it, and others will not. Incidentally, TI recommends no more than 6' of cable for the PCM270x series.
About volume control, I've been thinking about saying this a while and here it is at last =)
I argued earlier in this thread of how the interface should be connectable to the joshua tree and how this was better than simply using digital software domain volume in the OS. After doing tests and calculations I've come to the conclusion that you Russ and Brian were right and digital volume is far superior.
24bit is good enough to reduce lots without losing SQ.
Only case I still halfly argue that touching volume management would be useful is if the internal bit depth was increased to 32bit: The TPA receives standard 24bit from the OS, converts to 32bit, attenuates in 32bit according to instructions by the OS and then sends to say the buffalo. But even this would probably be overkill since except in very extreme cases 24bit is enough and some more.
I've been thinking about writing together a thread or article where I present my proof of why 24bit is enough even when reducing bit depth by attenuation in such a way that anyone similar to me that believed digital attenuation to be bad for SQ can be convinced otherwise. And if they still don't believe the article they can follow easy steps and test and listen (and measure) for themselves =)
I argued earlier in this thread of how the interface should be connectable to the joshua tree and how this was better than simply using digital software domain volume in the OS. After doing tests and calculations I've come to the conclusion that you Russ and Brian were right and digital volume is far superior.
24bit is good enough to reduce lots without losing SQ.
Only case I still halfly argue that touching volume management would be useful is if the internal bit depth was increased to 32bit: The TPA receives standard 24bit from the OS, converts to 32bit, attenuates in 32bit according to instructions by the OS and then sends to say the buffalo. But even this would probably be overkill since except in very extreme cases 24bit is enough and some more.
I've been thinking about writing together a thread or article where I present my proof of why 24bit is enough even when reducing bit depth by attenuation in such a way that anyone similar to me that believed digital attenuation to be bad for SQ can be convinced otherwise. And if they still don't believe the article they can follow easy steps and test and listen (and measure) for themselves =)
Last edited:
Well, I finally gave up after waiting for near 15 months. I know these guys have day jobs etc. But at some point they have to commit to a date and tell us all. So I have gone with a competing product. Too bad, I really want to support Twisted Pear. I have the BIII and Legato 3.1 and they are impressive.
One thing I do not want to do is start a thread bashing these guys. To their credit they do not put something out too soon. I'd rather wait then be a "paying" beta tester. Like I said in my earlier post, the stuff I do have from them is really good. The BIII / Legato combo just blows away the Rega Saturn I just sold. That's says a lot about the quality of the products they sell. Plus they stand behind it 100%.
Last edited:
I don't believe we have announced anything yet other than that I am working on it. 
It does not offend me if you can't wait and get something else. I am doing this as a hobby, so I can't say I feel terrible pressure to get it done. I would rather do it right, because I am doing it for myself.
I didn't even start this thread.
I am closer than ever to completion, and in fact have already prototyped several times. I have a PCB coming soon, and if I like it, we will offer it.
As for AC2 - It is completely done from a hardware perspective. Brian has just been far too busy to think about kitting it yet. I am sure if he gets some time we can make it available. If nothing else I am willing to sell bare PCBs and just make the code available.
Cheers!
Russ
It does not offend me if you can't wait and get something else. I am doing this as a hobby, so I can't say I feel terrible pressure to get it done. I would rather do it right, because I am doing it for myself.
I didn't even start this thread.
I am closer than ever to completion, and in fact have already prototyped several times. I have a PCB coming soon, and if I like it, we will offer it.
As for AC2 - It is completely done from a hardware perspective. Brian has just been far too busy to think about kitting it yet. I am sure if he gets some time we can make it available. If nothing else I am willing to sell bare PCBs and just make the code available.
Cheers!
Russ
Multi-Chanel PC to BIII. What options?
Last night I ordered the BIII for a m-ch build (my 1st DIY). I'll do digital x/o and room correction in software. Most (or all) sources are from PC.
My question is: In the absence of TPS USB, is the exaU2I the only way to get m-ch from PC, or could I alternatively use a RME HDSPe AES or Lynx AES16e or other high-end sound card into B-III? NOTE: If possible, I would like to do DSD.
If sound card option works, what is my connection type from PC card to B-III.
Thanks in advance!!
Last night I ordered the BIII for a m-ch build (my 1st DIY). I'll do digital x/o and room correction in software. Most (or all) sources are from PC.
My question is: In the absence of TPS USB, is the exaU2I the only way to get m-ch from PC, or could I alternatively use a RME HDSPe AES or Lynx AES16e or other high-end sound card into B-III? NOTE: If possible, I would like to do DSD.
If sound card option works, what is my connection type from PC card to B-III.
Thanks in advance!!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.