diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Digital Line Level (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/)
-   -   Volumite for Buffalo II? (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/164194-volumite-buffalo-ii.html)

markusA 31st March 2010 07:20 AM

Volumite for Buffalo II?
 
The volumite for Buffalo II dac, how does it work and how good does it sound?

Is the volume controlled entirely in the digital domain? Won't that make you loose resolution?

qusp 2nd April 2010 01:44 PM

it costs only 25 dollars, try it out. IMO its actually the perfect volume control, it has no effect on input or output impedance of anything and it acts upoon the dac registers far and above any area that is of interest to audio. the buffalo is 32 bit remember and we use at most 24, yes its digital and yes it reduces the dataset used to describe the music, but it has zero effect on the useable dynamic range. it is the same information set that is used for taps for EQ of multichannel audio etc AFAIK, I dont have access to the datasheet and nobody who does can tell you ;|

markusA 4th April 2010 07:03 PM

I was thinking that myself. Tampering with the digital signal is always scary but it looks to be worth a try.
Like you said, if it works it's the perfect volume control.

qusp 5th April 2010 01:56 AM

oh its definitely worth a try, I should have mentioned that i've been using it on my 32S to great effect for quite a while now, waiting for the V2 version to arrive and i've been using basically the same technology in my small home recording setup for levels control for ages. any relatively modern or remastered music you listen to on your dac is likely to have been created using such systems

Spartacus 5th April 2010 02:03 AM

Digital volume control will negatively affect signal to noise ratio and PSRR. Having said that, I use something similar to the Volumite and I find it works very well. There are compromises for any approach, so just pick whatever works well in your system.

qusp 5th April 2010 02:47 AM

but doesnt it use the bits not used for audio with the sabre chip? I suppose as I mentioned it is still using the info used to describe the information we DO listen to, so yeah like yo say penalty anywhere you go I guess, sure is audibly the best type i've used though

markusA 5th April 2010 09:16 AM

I have a lightspeed clone standing by as comparrison. ;)
Let's hope the TPA crew start taking ordres for the B-II again soon.

tritosine 5th April 2010 09:30 AM

Qusp where you got all this ? 32bit ? The sabre32 isnt even 24... 32bit is the internal precision. And yes, you throw away SNR (that hard earned 130x so theres much left ) .

qusp 7th April 2010 07:52 PM

yes I know the audio isnt 32 bit, but I had assumed that the registers were using the bandwidth not used for audio. I think you misinterperated my post, I wasnt ever saying the audio was 32bit, but that the chip was and we only use at the most 24 for audio, leaving 8 bits to describe other functions. is that not whats going on? serious question. for instance in a graphics format; lets take a photoshop file. the actual colour information is stored most often in 24 bit for photograhic imagery, but the photoshop file format is 32 bit, the other 8 bits are used to describe layer information, masks etc without having any impact on the 24 bits used for the photo, I had assumed something similar was going on with the dac registers in a 32 bit audio chip only using ~24 for the actual audio stream.

tritosine 7th April 2010 08:02 PM

You do throw away actual bits that were part of the actual 22-22.5 , no free lunch here. With the ESS theres much SNR to begin with, most of this because of the ASRC is efficient cleaning up jitter beforehand of the sigma delta modulator.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:18 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2