• Disclaimer: This Vendor's Forum is a paid-for commercial area. Unlike the rest of diyAudio, the Vendor has complete control of what may or may not be posted in this forum. If you wish to discuss technical matters outside the bounds of what is permitted by the Vendor, please use the non-commercial areas of diyAudio to do so.

Twisted Pear Audio - Buffalo32S (ES9018 DAC)

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
F

fmak

Member
Joined 2001
Russ White said:
I did not do the tests myself yet (someone else with a Buf32S did) but I will soon.

I knew the DAC would accept the sample rate, what I was waiting to confirm was that the FIR filter would still work as designed. The datasheet was not clear to me in this respect.

ESS has confirmed to me that the OSF/FIR will operate correctly. :)

Soon I will try it for myself.

Cheers!
Russ
Click to expand...

Russ

Just pulled back to ask this question first.

IC7 looks like the chip for the spdif comparator input. has this changed and what is the maximum frequency this will support. I am interested in feeding 352k via conventional player software and upcoming hardware.

Fred
 
steve jones

steve jones

Member
Joined 2002
fmak said:
Russ

IC7 looks like the chip for the spdif comparator input. has this changed and what is the maximum frequency this will support. I am interested in feeding 352k via conventional player software and upcoming hardware.

Fred
Click to expand...

I've already asked and Brian answered on another thread.

He said the SPDIF comparator they include for IC7 on the Buffalo II is a LMV7219.

The earlier Buffalo versions were supplied with a LMV7239 that worked OK. The LMV7219 was one that Leo on another site swapped out and was pleased with the improved performance at the higher sampling rates.
 
BrianDonegan

BrianDonegan

Member
Joined 2004
twistedpearaudio.com
The earlier Buffalo versions were supplied with a LMV7239 that worked OK. The LMV7219 was one that Leo on another site swapped out and was pleased with the improved performance at the higher sampling rates.
Click to expand...

Actually, only the very first batch of Buffalo24 DACs had the slower comparator. Every one since then has had the faster version. (I actually did quite a few free upgrades for those early buyers as well :))

You would need to use PCM input for those speeds (352kHz).
 
I

IngemarR

Member
Joined 2010
Will DXD be the ultimate high end format for optical discs and digital downloads?

Dear Russ,

is is kinda intersting that Computer Audiophile Computer Audiophile | High-End Audiophile Music Servers
is talking about
"DXD DACs on the horizon?"
and even though there seems to be some non consenus to what DXD is, there are some interesting info there.

FIM comments that they migh release one of their recordings, the "What A Wonderful Trio", that was made in DXD, DSD, tape, and 24/192 formats,
as a DXD download.

I find the comment from Bruce at FIM "We then took the files back to our studio and listened carefully to each one and chose the DXD version to master." an indication that DXD is they to go in the future.



Regards,





Russ White said:
I did not do the tests myself yet (someone else with a Buf32S did) but I will soon.

I knew the DAC would accept the sample rate, what I was waiting to confirm was that the FIR filter would still work as designed. The datasheet was not clear to me in this respect.

ESS has confirmed to me that the OSF/FIR will operate correctly. :)

Soon I will try it for myself.

Cheers!
Russ
Click to expand...
 
I

IngemarR

Member
Joined 2010
Dear Russ,

it's been 6 weeks and I thought I'd check with you how the testing went?



Regards,


Russ White said:
I did not do the tests myself yet (someone else with a Buf32S did) but I will soon.

I knew the DAC would accept the sample rate, what I was waiting to confirm was that the FIR filter would still work as designed. The datasheet was not clear to me in this respect.

ESS has confirmed to me that the OSF/FIR will operate correctly. :)

Soon I will try it for myself.

Cheers!
Russ
Click to expand...
 
Russ White

Russ White

Member
Joined 2005
twistedpearaudio.com
I have successfully played DXD files from a couple sources (both DSP based) one worked quite well, the other not very well. The bit clock has to be clean(very clean) for good results. The example that worked well used a fixed clock of 22.5792mhz and worked synchronously. It locked quite well with both 80mhz and 100mhz clocks. You actually get better DNR with 80mhz but the DAC will lock onto worse signal with 100mhz.

In the end, running at 352khz has some pretty serious drawbacks to THD and DNR(measured). And I have found that 192K samples sound much better, at least to me.

Cheers!
Russ
 
Last edited:
I

IngemarR

Member
Joined 2010
Dear Russ,

thank you for testing playing DXD files. It is interesting - but not strange -that the source affects DXD playability.

100 MHz clocks! - Long time ago, audio stopped at 20 kHz...today we use 100 MHz clocks for audio! Fascinating, as Mr Spock used to sat.


Regards,


Russ White said:
I have successfully played DXD files from a couple sources (both DSP based) one worked quite well, the other not very well. The bit clock has to be clean(very clean) for good results. The example that worked well used a fixed clock of 22.5792mhz and worked synchronously. It locked quite well with both 80mhz and 100mhz clocks. You actually get better DNR with 80mhz but the DAC will lock onto worse signal with 100mhz.

In the end, running at 352khz has some pretty serious drawbacks to THD and DNR(measured). And I have found that 192K samples sound much better, at least to me.

Cheers!
Russ
Click to expand...
 
poseidonsvoice

poseidonsvoice

Member
Joined 2004
audiocircle.com/gallery/index.php?cat=48485
Paid Member
Brian & Russ (and anybody else who has the answers!):

I am a little late to the game of building up my Buffalo 32S dac (2nd generation). The version of the circuit board is 1.1, purchased in June 2009.

1) The parallel lines marked in 4 spots on the output section of the board should be cut if using this in a standard stereo system (non-headphone system) right? I've been told that the dac sounds a lot better with the lower output impedance.

2) On the reverse side of the board, there appear to be four areas where there are pictographs of resistors at locations R47-R50, I take it this is where I would solder my 2K resistors to set the output voltage to 2V rms output balanced and 1V rms output unbalanced?

3) If I am just using this with standard SPDIF digital input, I don't need to mess with any of the DIP switches right?

Thanks,
Anand.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom