Metrum Octave Dac - What are the Chips used - Page 15 - 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 2nd April 2012, 01:50 PM   #141
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Matrix
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
So you are just another poser...
Grow up son. Go to Audiogon or Audio Aficionado and search for my system. I use same username everywhere.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 02:21 PM   #142
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvi View Post
A little bit of sleuthing and it seems to me to be a DAC8581, the 4 ground pins are a giveaway, anybody with this dac and a multimeter should be provide confirmation?

Best pic I could find, just cropped and enlarged

Now to hunt down some Sasquatches
love the ninja hehe, yeah that was the best set of pics i could find too, he really should look into getting them professionally soldered. looks like he got the dac chips loaded but soldered the passives himself in a less than professional manner, far far too much solder; Mr Blobby pants. Otherwise the layout looks quite good and i'm a fan of the polymer tantalum caps hes used. One thing I cant figure out, is why he went to all the trouble of having a separate PSU case and then didnt have the rectifier in it, instead bringing AC in on the umbilical

Last edited by qusp; 2nd April 2012 at 02:25 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 03:40 PM   #143
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elberoth View Post
Grow up son. Go to Audiogon or Audio Aficionado and search for my system. I use same username everywhere.
You grow up. You are not some famous person that everyone needs to know about and I don't need to stalk you or search the whole web for your nickname.
IMO, you made an affirmation on this forum, you need to prove it on this forum.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 04:25 PM   #144
jitter is offline jitter  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
jitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
love the ninja hehe, yeah that was the best set of pics i could find too, he really should look into getting them professionally soldered. looks like he got the dac chips loaded but soldered the passives himself in a less than professional manner, far far too much solder; Mr Blobby pants. Otherwise the layout looks quite good and i'm a fan of the polymer tantalum caps hes used. One thing I cant figure out, is why he went to all the trouble of having a separate PSU case and then didnt have the rectifier in it, instead bringing AC in on the umbilical
I noticed the blobs too, looks like handiwork to me and not like it's been reflowed.
Perhaps the pics are of a prototype or a small pre-production series.

Unless the pic on his website under "Background information->Manufacturing and testing the mini dac" is just for show, it looks like a professional environment. The ESD mat on the table and the white coat are some of the signs. The mention of an "anti static zone" (we'd call it ESD Protected Area) also doesn't hint at it being made in a shed. Don't think they're using an Audio Precision, though...

Last edited by jitter; 2nd April 2012 at 04:42 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 10:33 PM   #145
diyAudio Member
 
5th element's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
I think it bares mentioning that there will always be two schools of thought with regards to things like this. Those that take the 'engineering' point of view of 'I want the signal to be as clean as possible and therefore as untouched by the equipment as possible' and then those that don't care and simply go for what 'sounds best'.

Sounding best often includes 'stuff' that degrades absolute linearity and therefore isn't truly neutral, but as it sounds better that's all that matters.

It is pointless in trying to convert someone from one way of thinking to the other. Sometimes one will change their way of thinking as they shift from a casual DIYer to someone with more of an interest and go from being Mr Subjective to Mr Objective-engineer and sometimes one will try and incorporate both into their design philosophy.

I personally would never buy this DAC as it goes against my way of thinking, but I'm certainly not going to bash anyone else for buying one and thinking it sounds great, as to them it probably does. To highlight what I mean by this though, is that having this DAC in my system would sit badly in my mind. I would not enjoy the music because it's measured performance is seriously mediocre and that in and of itself would be enough alter my perception towards dislike - I would not be happy using it.

I know that chasing out the bugs in a specific design, so that it goes from 0.00x% distortion to what it's truly capable of, down at 0.000x%, is likely to be imperceptible, but I will get far more enjoyment out of listening to the product with 0.000x% because I know that it has been designed correctly (I am speaking in terms of my own designs here).

This is what a lot of high end audio is all about though and what satisfies one persons idea of the perfect piece of equipment is often vastly different to someone else's idea of perfection.
__________________
What the hell are you screamin' for? Every five minutes there's a bomb or somethin'! I'm leavin! bzzzz!
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 10:39 PM   #146
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
But how do you feel when you are called deaf because you don't appreciate their non-filtered DAC? Especially when you don't talk of 0.000x% difference but more like 5%.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 10:56 PM   #147
diyAudio Member
 
5th element's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
Well just because two people prefer two completely different DAC designs doesn't mean that either of them are deaf, all it shows is that they have different listening preferences.

I mean there's bad sound and then there's really bad sound. Where the former simply means an overall high-quality system that is simply tuned to something not of your liking. The second being some 2 watt filterless class D chip amp clipping at 20% THD into some tiny speakers, with an absence of either end of the audio spectrum and then pushed beyond their xmax.

If someone preferred the latter there then yes, that's a scenario where you can say someone is deaf. But where reasonably subtle differences are involved it's harder to simply say 'your deaf' instead of really saying, I do not share your taste in audio reproduction.
__________________
What the hell are you screamin' for? Every five minutes there's a bomb or somethin'! I'm leavin! bzzzz!
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 11:05 PM   #148
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitter View Post
Nice pic, and here's the one from the Hifi Critic interview (I assummed it's the same as your's with the 19/20 kHz testtones). I'm sure if I were to use the AP we have at work, I'd come up with the same results.
The FACT is that 16 bit 44.1kHz NOS filterless is horrible.
CD reproduction was never ment to be NOS. Using a 24 bit 192kHz signal is equal to a very good 4x OS applied to the CD (better than what a DAC can OS from 44.1). And as you could see, at that sample rate, the filtering requirements are way lessend.
PS: I don't know if you have the capability (good ADC) to make some measurements on your new NOS filterless (is that true filterless?) DAC and post them here - I would definitelly trust them more than a typed poem.

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 2nd April 2012 at 11:07 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2012, 11:15 PM   #149
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Connecticut
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
But how do you feel when you are called deaf because you don't appreciate their non-filtered DAC? Especially when you don't talk of 0.000x% difference but more like 5%.
Wouldn't it be crazy if we were all fairly deaf and the whole high end audio industry was built on the power of suggestion and chasing ghosts?

But seriously, the fact is that there are many products out there that are hack jobs from a technical standpoint which get excellent reviews. The logical conclusions are either that a large percentage of "audiophiles" are either deaf, or that there are yet unexplained types of distortion which are audible but have evaded measurement for the past 40-odd years.

Last edited by chris719; 2nd April 2012 at 11:22 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2012, 12:16 AM   #150
diyAudio Member
 
5th element's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
I'd rather take the view that we're all rather deaf. Humans are notoriously bad at certain things and something like 'audio analysis' is definitely one of them, one reason for this is that our emotions are highly involved with our hearing. By nature we are creatures of choice and love variation in pretty much all aspects of life. We have loads of phrases from different cultures and different languages to the tune of - one mans... is another mans... etc. Audio is no different, I mean just look at the vast quantity of different styles and genre that exist, we all prefer listening to different things.

Measurements will probably confirm, on the whole, that there will be a trend among listeners, that we all prefer music to be reproduced in the same way. Things we can pretty much all agree on, like clean amplification (ie non clipping), low compression in the loudspeakers, a non-fatiguing sound and probably full 20-20k reproduction or something. What measurements can't do is say that person A prefers a gentle amount of bass boost from 20-80Hz and person two prefers it without.

Some piece of equipment might measure poorly, but as long as that poor measurement doesn't inherently sound unpleasant, then any bad measuring piece of equipment will gain fame with certain people because they prefer the way that thing sounds.

Is this a bad thing? Well it depends on your point of view, do you believe that music is about reproducing the stuff on the CD in the most unchanged/undistorted way? Or do you believe that music is about enjoyment and if this means that you prefer it 'unnatural' due to some EQ, does this make you wrong? Is Bill wrong because he prefers apples or is Kate wrong because she prefers Oranges?
__________________
What the hell are you screamin' for? Every five minutes there's a bomb or somethin'! I'm leavin! bzzzz!
  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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
dac chips kiwi88 Digital Line Level 2 5th August 2009 02:25 PM
dac chips for trade tubedude63 Swap Meet 1 25th May 2007 10:04 PM
Looking for 6 x TDA1545A DAC chips WALTER BURKHARD Swap Meet 2 5th April 2007 10:24 PM
F.S.: various Dac-chips Cobra2 Swap Meet 4 23rd November 2004 10:00 PM
Best DAC chips 5th element Digital Source 7 7th June 2004 04:08 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:40 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