Have you seen anything like this? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th January 2012, 10:51 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: At the output stage
Send a message via Yahoo to mr_push_pull
Default Have you seen anything like this?

Weiss DAC202 FireWire D/A converter Measurements | Stereophile.com
WOW!
__________________
we all love a good ol' stereotype until it's against us
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th January 2012, 11:53 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Nice indeed. But... nice enough to shell 6000$?
I can bet that is based on the flagship ESS DAC (ES9018 in mono or stereo mode).

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 8th January 2012 at 11:57 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 12:15 AM   #3
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Very impressive results. I do like the ESS chips, if that's what's in here. Amazing work on the analog section, for sure.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 02:46 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
That is just my (educated) guess. Anyway, ESS did their homework for analog section with OpAmps:
http://www.esstech.com/PDF/Applicati...PCB_Layout.pdf
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 03:07 AM   #5
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Since i prefer a Firewire DAC i've been following these guys for a while... either theirs or DAD would be on the short list if i won the lottery.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 03:42 AM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
What's up with the 15bit noise floor in figure 11 (slow filter mode)? Looks to me like a blooper...

<edit> Here's what the reviewer says about the filter giving the fig 11 performance:

Filter B offered a more three-dimensional quality, greater liquidity, and a smoother top end. I felt that Filter B played more to the DAC202's strengths, offering sound that even the most digiphobic audiophile could appreciate
__________________
No matter if we meanwhile surrender every value for which we stand, we must strive to cajole the majority into imagining itself on our side - Everett Dean Martin

Last edited by abraxalito; 9th January 2012 at 04:00 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 04:52 AM   #7
kevinkr is offline kevinkr  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
kevinkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Blog Entries: 6
I must be missing or misinterpreting something in figure 11 as I think I see a noise floor much lower than 15bits... Or another figure is being referenced? I do see an IM tone at 1kHz that is about -62dBfs..
__________________
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 04:54 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
You're missing that the FFT plot gives a noise benefit - you can't get the audio band noise level off the plot directly without knowing the bin bandwidth.
__________________
No matter if we meanwhile surrender every value for which we stand, we must strive to cajole the majority into imagining itself on our side - Everett Dean Martin
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 04:58 AM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
georgehifi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Manly Australia (Jewel of the Pacific)
Send a message via MSN to georgehifi
This statement in the Sterophile review worries me
"Which brings me to the DAC202's shortcomings. While it succeeded at presenting music with no trace of traditional "digital" sound, the Weiss lacked a bit of jump factor, excitement, and involvement. Sure, a component can sound "exciting" because of a tipped-up treble or harmonic dryness, but that's not what I'm talking about."

Which is excatly what I heard with the highly acclaimed Berkley dac and Ayre 7 or 9 also, super smooth clean no distortion. But it was trounced by a 1998 California Audio Labs CL15 which had the jump factor in spades and dynamic swing to make the Berkly sound dynamically challenged, but it was not as smooth. As it a good old PCM1702's in the Cal.
I have found I don't like todays super dacs (deta sigma) or whatever, they are smooth but lack life, jump factor, or whatever you want to call it. They claim better dynamic range on paper but to my ear cannot deliver it.
Gimee the good old PCM56 68 1702 1704 hooked up to a PMD100 or 200 any day warts and all over these new super dacs, I have not heard them yet make real dynamic music.

Cheers George
__________________
Avatar : Production Lightspeed Attenuator
www.lightspeedattenuator.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2012, 06:08 AM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgehifi View Post
I have found I don't like todays super dacs (deta sigma) or whatever, they are smooth but lack life, jump factor, or whatever you want to call it. They claim better dynamic range on paper but to my ear cannot deliver it.
I have to agree with you George I think its because the dynamic range measurement is a relatively long-term average and our ears are sensitive to much shorter time scales. So we pick up the noise modulation inherent in the heavy degrees of re-quantization necessarily involved.
__________________
No matter if we meanwhile surrender every value for which we stand, we must strive to cajole the majority into imagining itself on our side - Everett Dean Martin
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:45 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