Re: Re: How to bypass the internal oversampling filter
Because 192khz it is not enough. And it is not "right" for all but 96khz sources (2x).
It has been proved that the best sounding upsampling is 4x (or better 8x) times the original sample rate.
I wonder how the sabre treats a 24/174.6 spdif source like some master files...
NeoY2k said:
Because 192khz it is not enough. And it is not "right" for all but 96khz sources (2x).
It has been proved that the best sounding upsampling is 4x (or better 8x) times the original sample rate.
I wonder how the sabre treats a 24/174.6 spdif source like some master files...
Telstar said:
I now have two Sabre8 DACs. The first one was based on the demo board and is passive transformer out. The second and newest DAC is my own circuit board design that has op-amp I/V and then drives the transformers.
They both have a very clean sound. The passive transformers are better than 16-bit THD performance, 0.001%, and has better soundstage and clarity than the Camelot.
The op/amp I/V certainly has better THD, dynamic range, and linearity than the passive transformers.
Telstar said:
The Camelot that I have is the Arthur 3.0 MK3.
Attachments
Telstar said:
Switching power supply? Wasn't switching psu the source of all RF and bad noises?
Just asking
Do you use only ONE psu for all stages and parts?
If you were to design a DAC using the switching power supply of a PC, it would probably have bad noises. Careful design and linear post-regulation stages eliminates RF and bad noises. I am switching five watts, not five hundred watts.
I'm not suggesting you use a switching power supply for a power amp.
promixe said:
The most used standard for DSD is Sdif-3 and it is 75 Ohm BNC (same as wordclock)
But there are alternatives in the form of
MAC superMAC and hyperMAC (cat5/6)
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cach...hypermac+dsd&hl=nl&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=safari
But those are not intended for stereo
Further i'm interested in the exact same topic as you so if you have info keep us posted
Telstar said:
I take the answer to my question is a yes.
If so, do you think it is possible to use your circuit with several psu for the different parts?
I stated what it is in post #1020
It uses a 5-watt switching power supply that switches at 100KHz.
The outputs are filtered and post-regulated with seven linear voltage regulators.
Do you think it is impossible to make a switching power supply with low-voltage, low current outputs quiet, or do you just have an irrational fear of switching power supplies?
I would like to point out that you can get RF and bad noises from a mains transformer, diodes and linear regulators.
Several more PSU will make the box much larger and waste much power due to inefficiency. It will cost more. It is not necessary.
Originally posted by rossl
It uses a 5-watt switching power supply that switches at 100KHz.
The outputs are filtered and post-regulated with seven linear voltage regulators.
Do you think it is impossible to make a switching power supply with low-voltage, low current outputs quiet, or do you just have an irrational fear of switching power supplies?
OK thanks.
I think the second
Originally posted by rossl
I would like to point out that you can get RF and bad noises from a mains transformer, diodes and linear regulators.
Several more PSU will make the box much larger and waste much power due to inefficiency. It will cost more. It is not necessary.
Another idea: what about an external psu or battery power? Do you think it is really not necessary with your setup?
When we design an audio component, there are hundreds of decisions to be made on component selection. Cost versus performance. After some compromises, you will reach the point of diminishing returns where adding more parts and cost is not worth the performance gain. If I wanted to design a DAC that makes no compromises, I can spend $5K or $8K. Or more? I still would have to make compromises with a $5K DAC.
As my DAC is now, the design has isolation of all signal inputs and outputs. There is no noise or hum. Even when I turn the amp up high and a digital zero input on the SPDIF, there is no hiss, hum, or noise from the speakers.
I don't perceive much performance gain by running from battery power. Will it lower THD or the noise floor? It seems like a big hassle to me. Someone can try it and maybe perceive a gain, and that will be good for them. I would like to see measurments of it, But I am not going to try it. What will you use, deep cycle marine batteries?
There is an advantage to a DAC power consumption of only five watts. I leave the unit powered on forever. 24 hours/7 days.
That way the low jitter oscillator stays warm and stable. I think it sounds better after staying on for a week. But, that may also be because the other components are breaking in too.
Five watts costs about $0.50 per month in central Ohio. I don't worry about that much. Batteries will not be able to run the DAC 24 hours/7 days. A big external supply will use a multiple of that and waste the power as heat. It may be OK in the winter, but I don't want that heat in the summertime.
As my DAC is now, the design has isolation of all signal inputs and outputs. There is no noise or hum. Even when I turn the amp up high and a digital zero input on the SPDIF, there is no hiss, hum, or noise from the speakers.
I don't perceive much performance gain by running from battery power. Will it lower THD or the noise floor? It seems like a big hassle to me. Someone can try it and maybe perceive a gain, and that will be good for them. I would like to see measurments of it, But I am not going to try it. What will you use, deep cycle marine batteries?
There is an advantage to a DAC power consumption of only five watts. I leave the unit powered on forever. 24 hours/7 days.
That way the low jitter oscillator stays warm and stable. I think it sounds better after staying on for a week. But, that may also be because the other components are breaking in too.
Five watts costs about $0.50 per month in central Ohio. I don't worry about that much. Batteries will not be able to run the DAC 24 hours/7 days. A big external supply will use a multiple of that and waste the power as heat. It may be OK in the winter, but I don't want that heat in the summertime.
Dougie085 said:Not particularly
dusfor99 said:
I know this is way back from 8 months ago;
Although the last quote will be in the context of the first, I wonder what the real merits of option 2 above are. I mean, stream over Firewire from the PC ... yes please !
If we only think of the fact that many will be using outboard pro gear just to pass through SPDIF (e.g. PC -> (Firewire ->) RME Fireface -> (SPDIF ->) Highend DAC) (avoiding standard 16/48 USB interfaces), I would *love* to have the highend DAC connected directly.
Wouldn't that avoid a jittery interface ?
Or do we state that the ESS is not sensitive to this kind of jitter at all ?
But what about the driver ...
Peter
XXHE said:
I think we have the solution. Waiting for some diyer to use it
http://www.profusionplc.com/products/DICEII-TCD2200K.html
(about 50-60 euros)
http://www.dfm-audio.com/index.php?language=en
(click on products/oem)
the complete evaluation board with other inputs ~300€
it's a german maker and I have seen dome pro gear to use it.
They provide the drivers for windows and mac (not sure about vista, though).
Telstar said:
I think we have the solution. Waiting for some diyer to use it
http://www.profusionplc.com/products/DICEII-TCD2200K.html
(about 50-60 euros)
Yeah, I tried. You have to sign a NDA with the guys at TC tech to get the firmware source code. They are very nice and helpful, and I really appreciate the fact that they spend a little time to help some DIYers like me. So I did sign the NDA and got the source code. It looks pretty solid. However I really like open source projects, so... if other people want to hack it, then they also have to sign the NDA and stuff. I don't like this. So I'm going to use USB instead. Besides, it's simpler.
(also some people reported bad behaviour like skips or clicks with the Dice).
http://tinyurl.com/58nqwf
here is a cool paper about DICE, wonder what happens if you set low corner freq (the "spuriae" as they put it , dont seem to dissapear anyway) like 0.1 hz. I bet some high-ish buffer as "minimum". I dont think Im goin to change my Lynx aes16. Dice looks cool for R2R though.
here is a cool paper about DICE, wonder what happens if you set low corner freq (the "spuriae" as they put it , dont seem to dissapear anyway) like 0.1 hz. I bet some high-ish buffer as "minimum". I dont think Im goin to change my Lynx aes16. Dice looks cool for R2R though.
Hello Dustin,
the Sabre seems to be a really stunning DAC. It was not possible to read the whole thread, but I am interested to test the Sabre in my system. There are some NONOS DAC based on TDA1541 and TDA1543. The best of the bunch has 4 paralleled TDA1541. IIS comes from somewhat modified CD-PRO2 with a Tent Crystal. Passive I/V with step up output transformer performs best (after six years of development of different tube and jfet output stages)
So this should be a interesting comparison - highly tuned NONOS versus Sabre.
Would it be possible to obtain a prototype board?
thank You
Peter
the Sabre seems to be a really stunning DAC. It was not possible to read the whole thread, but I am interested to test the Sabre in my system. There are some NONOS DAC based on TDA1541 and TDA1543. The best of the bunch has 4 paralleled TDA1541. IIS comes from somewhat modified CD-PRO2 with a Tent Crystal. Passive I/V with step up output transformer performs best (after six years of development of different tube and jfet output stages)
So this should be a interesting comparison - highly tuned NONOS versus Sabre.
Would it be possible to obtain a prototype board?
thank You
Peter