so would i , if they had a box version , i already own minidsp and after the learning period it actualy sounds much better than i thought it would
What about this one ?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/215379-dsp-xover-project-part-2-a-34.html
Is n't it équivalent ?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/215379-dsp-xover-project-part-2-a-34.html
Is n't it équivalent ?
Similar, in that both are DSP-based digital crossovers. Otherwise, not much equivalence (apart from the rough functional equivalence).
Hi Julf
Would you mind expanding a little bit ? Its difficult to compare for a novice, am loooking for digital to digital DSP.
BR
Well, I don't really know enough about chaparK's project to be able to do a side-by-side comparison. All I can say is that the hardware is different and the software is different
What turned me away from that project was the unbalanced outputs, but different people have different requirements...
That's what I meant, no digital from the Hypex for so cant use own dacs. Regarding clocks please see http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ultimate-weapon-fight-jitter.html#post2636245 its a long read but worth it. especially if (when ) the multi channel version is offered.
Last edited:
I Did not find anything about Dacs and output circuits in the brochure and pdf. So how to know, unless buy and try ? and not so cheap...
sure a pity digitals outputs are not provided for multi-channel XO with our beloved DACs
which are ?
Well, there are the specifications to start with, then you can of course look at the chips used...
sure a pity digitals outputs are not provided for multi-channel XO with our beloved DACs
I am sure the hypex DACs are more than good enough. I prefer to focus on the speakers, the algorithms and especially getting the digital EQ and crossover frequencies right.
The unsynchronized buffering approach has 2 main issues. One is the inevitable delay - not an issue in normal listening, but definitely an issue when using the system for movie sound or real-time performance. The other issue is the implication of "unsynchronized" - the DAC consumes data at one rate, the source feeds it at another, and there is no synchronisation. Clock drift will cause the buffer to empty or fill, eventually leading to buffer under- or overflow that might or might not be an issue depending on the stability and precision of your clocks, and the length of continuous music you listen to.
These might or might not be concerns depending on your application, the important thing is to be aware of the trade-offs in order to make an informed decision.
The question is if an external DAC will benfit. The goal of the DLCP was to make a transparent DAC. It that goal is reached, it doesn't get better.
If you for some reason absolutely want to use your own DAC, it makes no sense to buy a product where you're paying quite a bit for a high quality DAC. The software in miniDSP is great and their newest minishark has plenty of processing power.
The DLCP is really for those who want a high quality one in all product. And it would be nice to hear some feedback soon from people who have tried it and compared it to something of good quality.
But imagine the audiophile bragging rights of a full stack of 3 or 4 DACs and 6 or 8 monoblock amps - all in a titanium or carbon fibre rack
Definetely, this is the way to go. Of course if Hypex Dacs are such good that they compete with other recognized Dacs on the market, why bother ? But they dont help us that much in this direction, and just a spec is "a bit short". The DAC processor is not even in the brochure. And we miss some real life SQ feedback. Problem at this price, not likely to have so many from DIY forum ?