Xmas
100 MHz XO:s - That is great
Thanks!
Now, that will make a great Xmas present
Best
Ingemar
100 MHz XO:s - That is great
Thanks!
Now, that will make a great Xmas present
Best
Ingemar
I have a BuffII unbuilt yet. I want to go dual mono. Will the 100mhz board be that much different so I can't match them up? Ideally I'd like both mono boards and channels to be identical. But now it looks like I'll have to buy 2 boards and sell off the one I have.
JD
JD
I have a BuffII unbuilt yet. I want to go dual mono. Will the 100mhz board be that much different so I can't match them up? Ideally I'd like both mono boards and channels to be identical. But now it looks like I'll have to buy 2 boards and sell off the one I have.
JD
I am in exactly the same spot, I have decided to go dual mono, and bought the 80mhz board.My board is unused.
I have never seen the problem. In fact it is only that other manufacturer that I have ever heard complain of it. It could simply be he did not optimally lay out his board or any number of other design flaws. I really have no way to know. That said, I doubt changing the DPLL would totally solve it.
Last edited:
You will not notice a difference between the XOs in general use, so it's not really an issue. If you are playing 384/32 material, it is *possible* one channel will work better than the other.
I am not sure what advice you are looking for. We don't even have the 100Mhz modules yet.
If you want two matching boards I would recommend getting two of the new ones. Or find someone who has an 80Mhz board to sell you.
We have to keep things current so my advice is always to by matching sets while you have the opportunity.
If you currently have a 80Mhz and used it together with a 100Mhz I doubt you would find any difference at all especially below 384khz.
We will update modules from time to time. This is perfectly natural.
You have a lot of options.
Cheers!
Russ
tried to , but my post mysteriously disappeared
JD
JD
I am not sure what advice you are looking for. We don't even have the 100Mhz modules yet.
If you want two matching boards I would recommend getting two of the new ones. Or find someone who has an 80Mhz board to sell you.
We have to keep things current so my advice is always to by matching sets while you have the opportunity.
If you currently have a 80Mhz and used it together with a 100Mhz I doubt you would find any difference at all especially below 384khz.
We will update modules from time to time. This is perfectly natural.
You have a lot of options.
Cheers!
Russ
Sounds equally good
(My system/hearing/brain is at the lower end in the scale of revealing differences)
cool!
A couple of questions.
I didn't know itunes could upsample. I have "Pure music" and it can, but itunes alone?
If the Sabre chip in the DAC can upsample, as can the Musiland mini, I presume, why bother upsampling before that? Unless the itunes (or Pure Music) upsampling engine is better than the Sabre. If you think it is, can you let me know why you think so?
It seems to me that the Sabre is going to do the best and lowest jitter upsampling and processing, so if your source is anything less than 24/192 you may as well let the Sabre do the work. The best quality will be native 24/192, the next will be upsampled with the best upsampler, which I think, but do not know, would be the Sabre chip.
Some people may remember Russ's post on his support site once before,
DXD files 24bit/352.8 kHz on I2S input? - Buffalo DAC - Twisted Pear Audio Support,
No, 100mhz is not necessary actually you don't even need 80mhz.
Keep in mind there is a penalty to DNR for running the clock faster than needed. It seems counter-intuitive but it is true.
It plays them fine, but I can tell you the I2S signal needs to be nice and clean.
Some people may remember Russ's post on his support site once before,
DXD files 24bit/352.8 kHz on I2S input? - Buffalo DAC - Twisted Pear Audio Support,
No, 100mhz is not necessary actually you don't even need 80mhz.
Keep in mind there is a penalty to DNR for running the clock faster than needed. It seems counter-intuitive but it is true.
It plays them fine, but I can tell you the I2S signal needs to be nice and clean.
Both statements are correct. By using the 100Mhz clock the DNR goes down but only a very tiny amount something like .125db. When you are talking about something around ~130db DNR(depending on the final application) for all practical concerns this is nothing to worry over.
Still, my personal choice would be to use two units with the same clock too.
Last edited:
He was doing it for testing purposes to prove a point.
There is no known issue with the ESS chip and high speed SPDIF. ESS has certainly not made any such issue known publicly or to me personally. And I am sure they would.For some reason I can't quote francolargo...
I agree about hearing the recording qualities more as my system improves (and I am not using a Buff II yet!). I put on an old favorite CD recently, hadn't heard it in a long time. Lasted 2 minutes as I changed to other music, stating "what a terrible recording". Old favorite on old equipment maybe....
Right now, my 2 options for USB DACs run through a USB/SPDIF or I2S converter that only accepts 16/44 rates, so no point in upsampling at the computer end. It all gets downsampled again anyway. I was thinking of purchasing something to convert higher sample rates, but would prefer an I2S option and then heard TP was working on the XMOS project, so I will hang on for now.
I agree about hearing the recording qualities more as my system improves (and I am not using a Buff II yet!). I put on an old favorite CD recently, hadn't heard it in a long time. Lasted 2 minutes as I changed to other music, stating "what a terrible recording". Old favorite on old equipment maybe....
Right now, my 2 options for USB DACs run through a USB/SPDIF or I2S converter that only accepts 16/44 rates, so no point in upsampling at the computer end. It all gets downsampled again anyway. I was thinking of purchasing something to convert higher sample rates, but would prefer an I2S option and then heard TP was working on the XMOS project, so I will hang on for now.
Actually, it is the quicktime component that does the upsampling. As Russ said, I just wanted to test what was said in a previous post. Musiland is basically the cheapest high rate usb interface one can buy. So that demonstrates the Buffalo implementation of the Sabre DAC is pretty robust.
Regarding upsample, I started by using the Metronome for the OPUS DAC (Wolfson WM8741) and could not hear any real differences. After chatting with people knowledgeable on Wolfson DACs, they said that some of the internal filters are disabled if you do the upsampling outside of the chip. They recommended that you let the chip do the upsampling because the "filters had been optimized for the internal upsampling"; and thus it seems as you stated above, that no external upsampler can be better than an internal upsampler because they are optimized to the internal filters).
So in general, I don't really use external upsampling.
Agreed, yet I find that the Buffalo seems pickier about its I2S than the Opus. Tapping into a rack-mount PC sound board, the Buffalo needs a 1024 sample buffer to manage the identical signal with which the Opus only needs 256 samples. I would like to know if that is a requirement for the on-chip upsampling (ok, nothing to do in this case) or perhaps an indication that the I2S signal is poor quality (in which case I should work to improve it).
Here our experiences differ with the Opus but not with the Buffalo, on which I don't hear significant improvements with upsampled redbook signals. I moved the Opus hardware control switches for filter selection and sample rate to the front panel to play with, and generally prefer upsampling and filter #1 on redbook material. [filter #2 if the volume is very high!] As Russ has pointed out to me, it's critical to set the 8741 to the correct input freq. range because the default filter configurations are different for each. Although it's a bit of a moot point for Buffalo 2, here is a link to test results on an extensive list of upsampling algorithms: SRC Comparisons
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.